full_text stringlengths 737 20.5k | score int64 0 5 |
|---|---|
I totally agree with this techknowlogy!! I think its brilliant! For students to be interested in such advanced techknowlegy is mind blolwing, cool and very ineresting to me. Personally i would use this techknowlogy quite often, it could be put to good and meaningful use and could also be very fun i would say. The ability to tell all the feelings and emotions a person in a picture or painting is very amusing and helpful.
For example, you could pull up a picture of Aidolf Hitler and detect his emotions he felt while causing such desasters and woner why? why so much destruction, murder, and cruelty? Why the jews? We can try and understand there point of view. Such information could be helpful.
This techknowlegy could also be used for schoool purposes; Projects for sure! Its time students took other interests thats fun anhd will keep them occupied and or out of trouble. This techknowlegy could make a huge difference in both studants and adults. Ita also good because its another form of math. ''We can actually calculate emotions; like math homework, computers can recognize the subtle facial movements we humans use to express how we feel. 6 emotions are classified; Happiness, surprise, anger, disgust,fear and sadness. After that they are then assosiated with each others movements of there facial muscles.
Finally therefore saying that, you can tell i really enjoy this subject; it grabbed my attention right away. I hope one day this becomes a thing because it is a brilliant idea and could really make a difference one day. Anyone at any age in any location can enjoy such techknowlogy and cololect such information. | 1 |
"Unmasking the Face on Mars"
The article On the Face on Mars is very interesting, states facts,and some opinions. When the Viking 1 spacecraft was circling then planet Mars it was takikng photographs forl posiible landing sites for Viking 2 spacecraft. But when doing its job itk discovered something unusaul and different about the red planet. What the spacecraft dikscovered that was so
mysterious to NASA scientist was an enormous face structure neaerly two miles from end to end. Many of some people who work for NASA say it was just another Martian mesa that was common on Mars. Could this be a natural landform or a sign form of another life form.
But this stuctuer or landform had Shadows that made it look like an Eygyptian Phharoah. Days later NASA revealed the photograph and the caption read "huge rock formation...wich resembles a human head...formed by a shwdows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." Others say that the face was built or made by another life form. But others are wrong, because there are many ways this landform couldve been built by natural land. Many reasons are stated in the article such as if in April it is winter on Mars then themweather couldve formed a natural land stucture. Another reason stated in the artcle by the writer would be the statement of how the face on Mars reminded him of the Middle Bitte in the Snake River Plain. | 1 |
I know for a fact that the Face on mars is not an alien artifact. Instead i know that it is just a normal landform. One of my reason for saying that is simple,on paragraph two it states"Only this one had an unusual shadows that made it look like an egyptian pharaoh,"but that is not my only reason for saying it is just a mesa. I will be explaing why i think that this landform on mars is just a natural landform.
First,i will continue to explain the shadows that gave this landform a face. On paragraph 3 the article states that the landform was given shape by shadows. the face parts the shadows gave were eyes,mouth and a nose. Also on paragraph two the article tells us that this landform was just another Martian mesa,which was common enough around another planet called Cydonia.
Next,i will be explaining the three diffrent pitcures that were taken,and how the (moc) knew how it was just a regular landform and not an alien artifact. On paragraph seven it tells us how the second time they took another pitcure of it,but with a better camera. Many people were very anxious to see teh first image appear on a JPL web site,revealing that it was just a natural landform.
That's not all,one paragraph eight,it states"but not everyone was satisfied". After that on paragraph nine mission controller looked at the face again,but it was not easy finding it,so they searched for the face until they found it again on April 8,2001. Then the Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look,they took the pitcures using a camera's absolute maximun resolution. If there were any objects like Egyptian-style pyramids you could see what they were. Then on paragraph twevle it telles us that face was just a messa or landforms common around the American West. | 2 |
Yes, it could be useful! It could be used to do a lot of good things. For example, we could use it to help us determine whether someone is lying or not during an interigation or in a court. However, in order or both of those to be accurate we would need to make some adjustments.
Nevertheless, the technology could be used to show how and when students in school become confused or bored with a subject, just like the author stated. It could also advance our understanding of how emotions work. The Mona Lisa, who we saw in the picture, looks like she has a weird cross between a smile and a frown. It is very fascinating how this all works. This can also tell us if celebrities and politicians are being truthful.
In conclusion, it could be very benifical to study this subject. It could further advance the science of the human face and emotions. Like the author said, who knew faces could reveal so much about our emotions. | 1 |
in VAUBAN,Germany executives are making a big leap on forbidden street parking,driveways and home garages. it costs $40,000 to buy a parking space becuse of the retricans on cars. The reason for this "smart planning" is becuse 12 percent of green house gases in Europe come from tailpipes. David Goldberg qoutes that "All of our development since World War II has been centered on the car and that will have to stop". In the United States the Environmental Protection
Agency is promting car reduction becuse of pollution being at such a high polution rate. paris has the most smog out of any other European capital.
BOGOTA,Colombia had a car free day and millions of colombians hiked,biked,skated or took buses. rain did not stop people from pertisipating in this event,for the first time two other colombian cities,cali and valledupar joined this event.
president Obama ambitous goals were to curb the united states greenhouse gas emissions unveiled last week. more americans are buying more and more less cars. Mr. sivaks son lives in san fransisco and has a car but takss bay area if nessecary. | 0 |
Reading this article on "Making Mona Lisa Smile" there would have to be an agreement on technology to read the emotional expressions of students. Well technology to begin with now adays is so advanced almost anything is possible. The reasoning behind how computers can read peoples emotions is proven by The Facial Action Coding System.
The sensors in a computer can decode how you are feeling just by the movement in a persons face called the "action unit." Dr. Paul Eckman, creator of FACS, has already classified the six basic emotions-happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. This is based off the movement of our facial muscles. There are different muscles in your face that help our cheeks, eyes, mouth and forehead to move different ways when we make different facial expressions. When we are angry, we squint our forehead together and our mouth tightens. When we are happy, the eyes squint and rise, along with our cheeks and mouth. it opens wide and the corners of our mouth also rise. along with our other emotions, FACS detects the movement of these muscles and determines whether we are happy or just faking it. Even by the slightest different movement, when a smile is on your face but isnt't real. Everyday, its seen on someones face normally their true emotion. If a person is smiling but not a big, and you are surrounded by this person, you may be able to tell if it's real or not. FACS proved that it van detect emotion through videos, images, or even in a mona lisa painting.
Yes, I agree with the article that was written becuase not only from the evidence that was supported in the article, everyone has put on a face that wasn't real and had been called out on it. Even the expressions a person makes are instinctual. When you get angry, sad, or happy, you make a face unintentionally before you even think about it. A person doesn't put on a front when they stub there toe. That persons face will cringe and they may cry or scream. FACS is accurate and even without it, it's sort of a given how someone is feeling by their facial expressions. | 1 |
The use of the Facial Action Coding System, to read emotional expressions of students, isn't valuable. It is in fact an incredible use of technoogy and it also would be neat to see how people are feeling, but you shouldn't be able to know how people are feeling without them personally telling you themselves. What if there is something someone is trying to hide? Something that is very personal and other people shouldn't know about, but you an see how they're feeling so you insist they tell you.
The technology might not actually work. I t might jut be a scam to make people think that they're feeling certain way about something. It shoudn't be possible to just use a machine to tell how someone is feeling inside.
The Facial Action Coding System was a very clever device. You could see how someones feeling in a picture, in person, you could even see how people feel towards homework. Even though it is a very interesting use of technology, you shouldn't be able to tune into other people's emotions, even if they are your students. Which is why this use of tehnology is not valuable. | 1 |
Have you ever tried becoming a seagoing cowboy? If not, I suggest that you consider joining the program. The job of a seagoing cowboy is to take care of horses, young cows, and mules which are sent overseas to people that need them. While being in the Seagoing Cowboy program, there are many positive things such as being able to experience adventures, visiting many unique places, and having the opportunity to help people in need.
A Seagoing Cowboy is able to experience many adventures. When Luke was a seagoing cowboy, he had the chance of experiencing a storm while at sea. Think about how exciting and adventurous that would be! Also Luke says that he found time to have fun on board, especially once all the animals were taken care of or unloaded. The cowbobys would then play baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds, or set up different sporting tournements. Experiencing a storm at sea and playing many fun games on board are just two examples of the many adventures that could take place as a seagoing cowboy.
If you are a seagoing cowboy, you not only have adventures but you also can see and visit many unique places that an average person wouldn't have the opportunity to see or experience. In Luke's nine years as a seagoing cowboy, he was able to see and experience some pretty interesting things in Europe and China. He specifically saw the Acropolis in Greece, and thought that that experience was very special. On top of seeing the Acropolis, he also was able to take a gondola ride in Venice, Italy. There would also be many more places to go and people to see.
The main reason for becoming a seagoing cowboy would be to help people in need. Luke specifically helped people affected by World War II. The people affected by World War II needed food, clothing, animals, and more. Luke helped with the animals. Luke states that he was very grateful for the opportunity of becoming a seagoing cowboy so he could help people in need. He says that it made him "more aware of people of other countries and their needs."
Becoming a seagoing cowboy is a great experience and very beneficial. Luke says, "the cattle-boat trips were an unbelievable opportunity for a small-town boy." | 2 |
Cars are very important to the life of a modern person. The car gets you where you need to go in the time that you want to go in. There are ways to limit car usage and still get your transportation to where you need to go. There are some advantages to not using cars all the time. One advantage is that if we stop using cars, then pollution will drop drastically. Another advantage to us not using cars is that we get plenty of excercise while we do other things than just sit in our cars.
Paris, France. Known for being the city of love, but doesn't have a certain love for cars. They banned car usage after days of near-record pollution(source 2 paragraph 10). In order to make sure that the residents don't use their cars still the placed a 22-euro fine ($31) for anyone still driving(source 2 paragraph 11). After only just a few days, congestion was down almost 60 percent in the capital of France( source 2 paragraph 14). In the United States, most kids these days aren't driving as much as they used to. They are buying fewer cars, driving less, and getting fewer licenses each year( source 4 paragraph 29). If this keeps up, then alot of sociologist think that this will have a huge effect on the environmet, which will lead to the end of pollution problems(source 4 paragraph 34). This advantage of having less car usage will not only help the earth, but it also will help the things on the earth including us humans and animals.
The final advantage that limiting car usage is that we will have plenty of excercise. A mother of two that had a car but the sold it in Germany said " When i had a car I was always tense, I'm much happier this way"(source 1 paragraph 3). She usually walks down the street to and from wherever she goes. Excercising is great for your health and you can just start by walking, biking, skating, roller blading and many more ways to get to where you need to go. In Bogota, Columbia millions of people hiked , biked, skated, or took buses to work (source 3 paragraph 20). "It's good oppurtunity to take away stress..." (source 3 paragraph 24) said businessman Carlos Artura Plaze when he was asked about the banning of cars for the third straight year in Germany( source 3 paragraph 24). Stress isn't good for your health and excercising is great on removing that stress from your body. Excersisng is a great advantage to limited car usage because you reduce stress, work out, and feel better all while you get to where you need to go at the same time.
The advantages that everyone gets from limited car usage is that the pollution will go down, and you get better excercise. If pollution goes down then you will have a better earth for everyone to enjoy, but you can't enjoy the earth if it's congested with polutted air. You also get great excercise when you walk, bike, skate to wherever you need to go instead of sitting in a car to go to your destination. These are only some of the advantages that you get when you choose to limit your car usage, but there are plenty more that you will experience as soon as you limit the usage of cars. | 3 |
Have you ever thought its time for change? Germany, New York , Columbia , and the United states are trying to reduce cars driven. Many benifits are coming from the downfall of cars being driven. Less stress, no smog from pollution, and less money spent on expensive cars.
Vauban's streets are completely car free. Heidrun Walter says she is less tense and much happier without a car. Walking, bycicling, and hyking are much more eco friendly. In 2006 a trend is growing in Europe. Vauban home to 5,500 residents may be the most expieriment in low car suburban life. Car ownership is allowed but there are few places to park large garages and the edge of development. 70 percent do not own cars and 57 percent sold cars to move to Vauban.
Car pollution is at its all time high, in paris motorists were ordered to leave their cars at home due to smog. 67 percent of vehicles in France use diesel fuel. Only 53.3 percent make up the rest of western europe. passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of green house gases, and up to 50 percent in some car intensive areas in the united states. Chicago to Shanghai people tend to make their homes which is a huge reduce of green house gas emissions from tailpipes.
Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as the years pass. Americas love for vehicles seems to be coolig down. The number of miles driven dropped in 2005 and continued droppimg steadily. In 2013 the number of miles driven was nearly 9 percent below its peak. If this persists there will be beneficialimplications for carbon emissions and the enviroment. Last year a study was found that driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009.
This is why life today would be fantastic and more benifitcial with car free cities and more walking, bycicling and hyking. less stress, less pollution, and less money spent on cars. As days continue the percentage of cars and miles driven decreases drastically. | 2 |
My name is PROPER_NAME and i'am arguing about why I think driverless cars should not be built. My personal opinion is that people are the only thing that should be in control of a car so that there is not question on what happened if there was to be an accident. Is the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" it even states that these cars warn the person in the car whenever they might have to take over because te cars can't move around an accident or for any other reason. The reason the cars do this is because they don't have the technology to navigate themselves through a car accident, around a construction site, or if there is major traffic ahead. I believe that these cars are unsafe and will cause harm to people because of the lack of fully advanced technology.
There are a few positives about the car such as being much more efficient on gas. The vision of these cars is public transportation. The insite on the cars is that they will be much more efficient than the everyday taxis that are used for transport and will be much more flexible that bus transportation. The only thng is getting the advanced technology that we need to make the cars function safely without any risk of an accident of any kind. | 2 |
In this story A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves,I go on a trip with my friend to Europe and get a once in a life time opportunity, to be a Seagoing Cowboy. In this essay I will be covincing you to participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program. I will talk about how you get to see the world, go site seeing, and get to have fun but also help your country.
First off, seeing the world. in the story I talked about how besides helping people I got to see the breath taking view of Europe and China but seeing the Acropolis in Greece was just beautiful. I also traveled across the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United States. Now who wouldn't want to see the world like I did and still help people in need?
Next, site seeing. On my journey to help, I got to take a gondola ( a boat) ride in Venice, Italy a city with sreets of water. Wouldn't it be amazing to go on a gondola and to go explore Italy? Also,I toured an excavated castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal on my way to China. Is'nt that just amazing?
Last but not least, what is a Seagoing Cowboy? I can't persuade you to be one if I don't tell you what it is! A Seagoing Cowboy takes care of horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas . Don and I signed up. When we were Seagoing Cowboys it was 1945 when World War 2 was over in Europe. We helped countries recover their food supplies, animals, and more. If you like helping people this would be a great job for you.
In conclusion, I hope I convinced you to be a Seagoing Cowboy. Now that I've told you about how you get to see the world, go site seeing, and what a Seagoing Cowboy is I hope I've helped you make up your mind. In the future, I hope more people will sign up and help better our would. | 2 |
Driverless cars are a great step in the direction of a better future. Along with making travleling easier on a day-to-day basis, there will also be less accidents, and people won't have to worry about paying as much money as they do now for things such as insurance. We should continue to manufacture our cars to make them completely driverless.
With automated systems in cars, there can be less worrying about driving errors being made everyday. As it stated in the article, these systems can apply brakes or reduce power from the engine when in a dangerous situation before the driver is able to. This will dramatically decrease the likelyhood of getting into an accident. This is also great because the driver won't have to worry about dealing with everything you have to do after that accident as well.
Even though the driver has to take control of the car in situations, such as being in a construction zone, continuing to develop cars to detect these things and navigate them will make driving safer in the long run for everyone. It would be more difficult for people to drive recklessly and make little mistakes that can cost someones life.
Many car companies are making improvments to cars to make them driverless everyday. With more and more companies joining the path to driverless cars, we will get to a safe and convient future faster than we know it. | 2 |
I am against driverless cars because of many reasons. One reason i"m against driverless cars because in paragraph 9 it talks about what if there was an accident who would be the fault the manufactur or the driver. I think the manufacturer should be the fault because its not the perosn using the product its the person who build it. They relied on them so they should be hela accountable for the situation. Then it says in paragraph 7 they are also considering using cameras to watch that drivers are remaining focused on the road. then turns around and says some manufacturers hope that they can install entertainment in the car for the driver. I believe that if they are geting entertained in the car how would they focus on the road. Also it says such displays can be turned off instantly. Just because it can doesnt mean it will. Another reason is the car is suppose to watch the person then how does the car drive itself. | 1 |
There has been an increasing concern about whether driverless cars should be developed as the technology of autonomous cars advances rapidly. Google has had cars that can drive themselves under special conditions since 2009 and many people are excited to witness the development of driverless cars. However, there are also some people worrying about the disadvantages of driverless cars. In my opinion, driverless cars have more negative effects than positive effects at present.
First of all, driverless cars are not safe enough and today, these so-called driverless cars can only control themselves under centain conditions, which means human drivers are still necessary. Just as BMW pointed out:" 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." This means human drivers still play an important role in driving and they should always be prepared so that they are able to take over immediately if necessary. It deserves consideration that whether what we want is just a driving-assisting system. If driverless car cannot control itself under all conditions safely, it is not worth devoting millions dollers and endless hours into its development.
In addition, there are not systematic laws about the driverless cars now. As the author mentioned in the article, who should be responsible if an accident happens because of technology failures, the driver or the manufacturer? There are many more problems to think about. For example, how could laws be made so that driverless cars must pass certain tests before entering market? Should people make a law to force car owners to do a function test regularly? All these problems deserve public attention and should be taken seriously.
Last but not least, drivers may be challenged mentally since they need to be prepared to take over the car while in most of the time, they do not have to do anything. The author stated that some manufacturers hope to do that by bringing in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays. It might be helpful. However, people still cannot enjoy "driving fun" and a better solution is needed.
In conclusion, driverless cars have negative impacts on the society, at least at this time. At present, the uncertainty of safety, the lack of relevant laws and the psychological challenges it brings make driverless car impossible to be widely accepted. As an attractive concept, it may be inspiring to people, but it still has a long way to go before it can actullay be taken into practice. | 3 |
I remember the stories my dad use to tell me about how in cuba he would have to walk 6 miles to get to school. Or when he got here that to work he would ride his bike to & from work. Cars are being put into use for no reason, people now a days go in the car to to the winn dixie thats right across the street. Do you know how much money is put into cars? you have to pay for gas, or if your car breaks down or has a leak. Cars are a huge investment and they are very dangerous to our society, the pollution cars cause i horrendous. Now don't get me wrong I would prefer to go in a car on a 3 hour ride to Orlando from Naples, i mean who would want to walk 1000s of miles? but to get in the car to get dropped off at school when you live 5 minutes away? thats ridiculous.
In Germany car use has been dropping and it has proven to provide a cleaner enviorment, healthier living and huge savings. Near the French and Swiss borders, it is forbidden to have hoe garages, street parking and drive ways. The streets are considered to be car-free zone. There are a few streets that cars are allowed, you can park in a larage car garage or at the edge of a development. But the parkng space is not free the parking space in $40,000, along with a home. Obviously that price is alittle bit pricey for people so 70% of theses families do not own cars and 50% acctually sold a car to be able to live there. The Enviormental Protection Agency is strongly trying to promote reducing cars and/or car usage all throughout the united states.
What comes to your head when you think about Paris? love, romance, coffee shops, expensive dinners on the effile tower. How about pollution, having to stay inside because the health cocerns? Paris has recently banned driving due to the pollution revolving th city of love. Motorists ere requested to leave their cars at home or suffer a $31 dollar fine, to some people the $31 dollars did not effect them so they kept driving and were fined. Almost 4,000 drivers were fined and 27 people had there cars impounded due to innappropriate reaction to recieving this fine. After 5 days of what frances citizens would call torture 60% of congestion was down, believe it or not Paris was rivaling Beijing, China known for having one of the most polluted streets in the world! The blame was put on diesel fuel, 67% of frances cars use diesel engines. Paris has moresmog than other european captials like london or brussels. Imagine how much clearer Paris would be if this car ban lasted a year!
Imagine how nice it would be to have zero traffic, no rush to get home. but how would you feel if the reason behind this traffic free day you had to ride a bike or go on the bus? you would probably take that traffic over a little exercise or having to stand next to a stranger. In Bogota, Colombia the have a event called "a car-free day" in this day colombians all gathered as they skated, biked or rode the bus to get to their destination. If you violated this you would have to fance a $25 dollar fine. The goalpf this even was to promote alternative transportation but to also hope for less smog. During this day not even rain could stop these colombians from participating in this event. Some people saw this as a save the world act also to relieve stress.
Cars are a way to travel long distances and should be used every once in a while but the world is asking you please put an end to this, use of cars for every little thing, start to set a goal to live a happier healthier life and create a safe eviorment by ending car use, Start small like riding a bycicle to the grocery store, then decide to take a walk to the neighbors right around the street. | 4 |
This article tells us the technology of facial and emotion recognitions. Everyday we may walk around with expressions on our faces that shows how we feel or what you want to show others what you're feeling. Other times we put on a happy face but on the inside we're actually pretty sad. Dr. Paul is the creator fo FACS (Facial Action Coding System). I am for this new way of knowing someone's emotions just looking at a picture and especially through paintings.
Dr. Paul is the creator of FACS. He was able to identify variety of emotions in one picture or painting. Eckman have found the basic emotions such as happy, surprise, angery, disgusted, fear, and saddness. They were also able to identify mixed feelings. Some examples of knowing what one person might be thinking. When a person raises their eyebrows they are showing that they are surprise. When a person shows that they are angry their eyebrows point inward and eyes are focused intently at someone else. When we are with our friends we are able to know what they are thinking or feeling most of the time. We know when they are happy, sad, or even excited, this technology allows us to look into it deeper. Unlike our PC computers at home, it doesn't have that advance technology that can read our expressions. In the article is says that they would write dome simple codings to different emotions. In an environment like school it would be interesting to use this type of technology among the students. FACS would help the teachers to identify which students are paying attention and who are bored just using this.
In the painting of Mona Lisa they were able to figure that there was 83 percent happy, 9 percent disguished, 6 fearful, and 2 percent anger. This technoloy can be helpful in many ways. It calculates emotions through movements in a picture and varies in different emotions, and are able to calculate mixed feelings. Some students go through some hard times and others may not see the things they are going through just looking at their faces. Some students are able to show the opposite emotion of what they are feeling to guard themselves and not be seen as vulnerable. | 1 |
We should be allowed to study Venus. To begin with Venus and Earth have somethings in common even though Venus may be a some what dangerous planet there are some things that they have in common. Something that the author said was " Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life just like Earth." In other words what the author is trying to say is that Venus maybe once had the same features just like Earth does today. But now it's all dry. There are some features that Venus has and Earth too. Venus has a rocky sediment and has valleys, mountains and crater just like Earth does. Another good reason we should study Venus is that maybe one day the Earth were in right now may dissapper and we would have to move to a different planet. Studying something would be bad we all have to try new things. Even though Venus sounds like a very dangerous planet are could be some benfits to exploring new planets. We could find new and interting things about different planets. | 1 |
As the author defends the claim that the exploration of Venus is a "worthy pursuit," I, however, believe that this statement is not proven very efficiently. Although the author refers to NASA and the experiments they've carried out, the information just does not sufficiently back up the statement that Venus is a "worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents." The author continuously describes the challenge it would be for humans to carry out the study of Venus from space, as well as using terms that convey the assumptions he or she is making based on his or her opinion. Many risks would be taken in order to physically explore Venus, so with this information in mind, I believe the author did not support the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers.
In order for mankind to study the "cloud-draped world," they would have to undergo much training to even be prepared to come near Venus and its harsh conditions. As stated in the text, the conditons on the planet are "far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth." Even with advanced technology that we have today, the article states that "no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours." If the technology we have today can't even survive the conditions on Venus, how are humans supposed to be able to? Even though the author claims the conditions are "not easy, but survivable for humans," the temperature can climb up to over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. These pieces of evidence from the excerpt convey the idea that Venus and its characteristics are far too dangerous for humans to even go near.
In addition to Venus' extreme conditions, the challenge of collecting physical evidence from the planet would be extremely difficult as well. Even though humans could possibly hover 30 miles above the ground level, the texts states that the vast distance would provide only "limited insight on ground conditions," and it would "[render] standard forms of photography and videography ineffective." Along with that, the author admits that "researchers would not be able to take samples...from a distance." The challenge that the study provides would simply not be worth the time, money, and risks. If man were to go to extreme lengths to reach within 30 miles of a planet and not be able to collect and evidence or data, it would not be a successful mission if the goal was to obtain new information about the planet.
Moreover, the author's word choice contributes to the idea that his or her claim is not very well supported. When examining the similarities between Earth and Venus, the author uses the word "probably," saying that "Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." The word "probably" gives off the impression that the author is making an assumption about the fact that Venus could support life just like Earth based on a common feature between the two planets. It is dangerous to make assumptions about subjects such as this, because it would be very costly if it turned out to be incorrect in the end.
After considering both sides of this controversial claim, I believe the author did not support the claim that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. Although the author referred to the study being beneficial to man's sense of imagination and innovation, it is simply just too dangerous. The author repeatedly describes the challenge it would be for humans to carry out the study of Venus from space, as well as word choice that conveys the assumptions he or she makes based on their own knowledge. Many risks would be taken in order to physically explore Venus, and I believe the dangers could be more costly than the knowledge gained through the experience. I believe the author did not support the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. | 5 |
"Driverless Cars Are Coming" article presents many aspects, both positive and negative, about these cars. Some of the positives are the cars are forseen to use half of the fuel today's cars use, offer more felxiblity than a bus, and people would not have to buy cars anymore. I personally believe that this is a bad and possibly dangerous idea. Driverless cars have no laws regarding them and are hard to decide who is liabe, and the cars are not very well devolped yet.
Firstly, the law aspect of Driverless Cars is majority of the time nonexistent. An exception to the pervious statement is that these cars are illegal even to test on roads in most state makeing it very obvious there has been little real-life testing. So no laws are in place to prepare for the new problems that will arise when these cars are actually in use and on the roads. If the technology fails and someone is injured who is at fault? Or if there is property damage? Should the car manufacturer or the driver be at blame for what happens? So many questions that will need to be answered and laws written for if these cars are ever use don the roads. But, I stand by the current laws which were written with the assumtpion that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times.
Secondly, these cars have very little testing, and devolpment to become fully driverless. All of the current "driverless" cars still require a human for work zones, accidents, and even sometimes coplicated traffic. Sure, these cars can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves meaning they have the basics down. But, without an alert driver this could cause many accidents. Also since these cars are dependant on coding, computer chips, and sensors what if one of these systems fail will the car have a backup or human driving needed. Because the facts is so much can go wrong with technology why would someone want to put all of their trust into this technolgy. I think it is clear that human drivign should always be an option no matter how advance and well madee the car is it is not smart to put all of your trust into a machine without human assitance needed.
In the end despite all of the benifits and possiblities driverless cars provide it is not a good idea to put thes on the roads because of the lives these cars might put into danger. Even if they were fully safe their would be multiple questions concerning the law when these cars are concerned. It might be the conservative choice but, it is also the safe choice to say no to these new driverless cars. | 3 |
Cars have been around since the 1800's and have been popular ever since. Although, in recent years the number of cars bought and lincenses attained have been dropping. Car usage has also dropped, which is a good thing. Because of limited car usage, people are helping the environment and benefiting themselves.
Cars emit pollutions which harm our health and the environment's health.
"...Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States." Cars make up a large amount of the emissions that do harm to the environment. When car usage is limited, less people drive, which in turn limits pollution. "... but also in the developing world, where emissions from an increasing number of private cars are owned by the burgeoning middle class are choking cities." Again we see that cars are polluting our world, and it's caused by us. " it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment, since transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions, just behind power plants." Cars and other transporation are releasing emissions which are harming the environment. Limited car usage clears up the pollution which helps us and the environment stay healthy.
Many people are taking up new ways of transporation due to bans and such which are due to limits on car usage. They are taking public transportation, walking, carpooling, and so on. All of these methods of alternative transportation are beneficial. "They organize their summer jobs and social life around where they can walk or take public transportation or car-pool with friends." It is better to limit car usage because not only are you helping the environment, but you're also saving money and helping yourself out. Due to the lower amount of people who buy cars because of limited car usage, car corperations are also changing. "He proposed partnering with the telecommunications industry to create cities in which 'pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commerical and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resoureces, lower emissions and improve safety.' " The way people live will benefit from lower car usage. Our lifes will be much safer. Although some people may be upset if they can't drive their cars when they want, in the long run it benefits all of the community.
As bans continued to be passed and people are choosing to walk or take the bus instead, limted car usage continues. We can see that it is beneficial to us and will help our environment in the long run. Limited car usage is truely a good thing for us and will hopefully continue. | 3 |
Someone takes a selfie, and sends it to their friend trying to make it seem like they are completely happy with no problems at all. However, what if you were able to tell if your friend is really happy or not? There is a facial coding system that can identify other's emotions. The use of this technolgy to read emotional expressions is valuable because, it can recognize facial movements to see how other's feel, the computer can make faces seem more expressive, and it also teaches you more about your smile and whether it is genuine or forced.
It has been shown that Mona Lisa was about 83% happy when the picture was taken, it shows that it was mostly a happy smile. There are usually ablout six different kinds of emotions, such as,"happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness". This shows that there many emotions that could be discovered by just a simple picture. As an example, your eyebrows are usually raised when your are surprised or your lips would be tightened to show anger. The software would usually have mixed emotion, and it is usually compared to a nuetral face that shows no emotion. We humans are actually able to do the same thing, just by the look/expression on their face. Some specific artists such as, da Vinci studied human anatomy to help them paint specific emotions with facial emotions.
Computers are capable of doing many different things that not even humans can do. One very important thing is creating different expressions for others. "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." This was said by Dr. Huang, and it was normally used to make even animated faces more expressive. It is true that most human communication is nonverbal, and some computers may need to understand that too. There are some simple instructions that encode different emotions, this was also used to create Mona Lisa's smile.
This system teaches you more about your smile and whether it is forced or not. There is certain muscular action units that indicate the difference between both smiles. For the real smile which is called "zygomatic major" which are actually muscles that begin at your cheek bones, it would lift the corners of your mouth. However for the false smile, the mouth would be stretched out sideways and it would ues the zygomatic major and the risorius. To many exerts they know that it is true thatfaces tell the truth and when a celebrity takes a selfie with a false smile, it is usually a sign that it they are not being truthful. There is an important theory of emotion that expresses and produces emotions.
Facial action coding systems can be used for very useful things. This this technology is extemely valuable because, it is able to recognize how others feel by facial movements, more expressive faces can be made with these computers, it shows the difference between genuine smiles and forced smiles. | 3 |
The Challenge of Exploring Venus
The authour suggests that studing Venus is worthy pursuit dispite the dangers it presents, the aouthor in my opinon he does support his idea very well beuse he mentioned that venus is often refferd to as earth's "twin", venus is the closest planet to earth in tearms of density and size, and occasionally in the distance to,i didnt know anything about this till i just read this i think that this is a part that supports his idea.
There are so many things that i didnt know about venus that im learing by reading this paper so it is worthy."each previous mission was unnamed,and for a good reason becuse not single spaseship has landed it venus"this was a real good information that make me want to know why it can never make it to venus even though it not far from earth.a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankeys venus.
The author has really grat supporting fact on studying venus is a worthy persuit dipite its dangers. | 1 |
Normally in everyone's mind when they are a teenager they want to have a car to go to places such as the mall, beach, etc. There are advantages though to limiting car usage. The whole planet should really hear or read about it, it's amazing to what these advantages can do for you, others, and our ecosystem.
The first of many reasons why we should limit car usage is because of greenhouse gas emissions. "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of gas emissions in Europe. . . and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States(Source 1)." This just shows the evidence by the future if this keeps going like this the Whole entire planet would be all polluted which would make living conditions harder than they have to be. Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two states "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way(Source 1)." Looking at this quote tells me that she must have been stressed with the car, maybe it was because of the traffic or the gas bill who knows, but she does feel happier without it so she must feel more at ease that her area is not cramped up with cars. In Vauban, Germany if you own a car where the tram to downtown Freiburg runs, there are only two places to park-large garages at the edge of the development, where a car owner must buy a space, for $40,00, along with a home. Well sign me up with a bike or running shoes because I don't have that kind of money to spend just to live in a area with no cars.
Furthermore I would like to go to Paris, but sources state that "Paris typically has more smog than other European capitals(Source 2)." Reuters had found 147 micrograms of particulate matter or PM per cubic meter compared with 114 in Brussels and 79.7 in London. That is pretty bad and knowing that people say that you must go to Paris, yeah sure for I can get polluted air into my system got it. "Diesel fuel was blamed, since Frtance has . . . [a] tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline." According to Reuters "Diesels make up 67 percent of vehicles in France, compared to a 53.3 percent average of diesel engines in the rest of Western Europe(Source 2)." Even Bogata, Columbia has a "Car-free day" and if you don't follow the rules of car-free day you will be fined $25. Carlos Arturo Plaza stated "It's a good oppurtunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," as he and his wife rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife(Source 3).
It is just clear that most areas in the world are trying to change the way we live our lives for the sake of all human life. It is a good oppurtunity to relieve stress and lower air pollution as the source stated before. So the next time you want a car think to yourself "Which one is much more helpful to the planet's ecosystem?" | 3 |
The author suggest that studying venus is a worthy pursuit depite the danger it persents. No one has travle to Venus in over three decade. In order to know what up there we need samples in which we can't get. venus is in unknown planted that we seem to know half way a lot about. Of course scientist want to explore venenus that why they are in the process if created a simlater to reach venus.
Venus in the earth are closer then you might think. Venus the close planted in earth terms density and size, and occasionally the close in distance too. Earth, venus and mars are our other planetary neighbor. If you think about it venus is like right around the conner. So close but yet so far venus is way diffent then earth,and mars that why it hard to travle there.
The danger of venus. Numerous factors contribute to venus's reputation as a challenging planet for humans ro study, despite it's proximity to us. The atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets venus which is very danger for us human to go upon on. Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system even though mercury is closer to our sun.
Venus is a dangerest plantet but want to be explore the most. More importantly, researchers cannot take sqample of rock, gass or anything else, from a distance. Therefore, scientists seeking to conduct a thorough mission to understand venus would need to get up close and personal depite the risks.
On the other hand scientists even discussing faurther visits to its surface. Long ago, venus was probably cover largely with oceans and could have surpported various forms of life just like earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains and craters. furthermore. Returning to venus seems indisputable, but what are the options for making a mission both safe and scientifically productive. Not easy conditions, but it survive for humans.
Venus and a dangerst and also the safest place to travle. Venus is a mystireser place that makes your mind qustion the world around us. If we get to experice venus on day then why not mercury, or pluto these are a unknown planted that we a the people need to intise are mind on. We need to explory tyhe unknown of the world and around us. what can't america can't. the unknown is closer then you might think. | 3 |
I do feel that this would be helpfull in a lot of classes. Not all the students understand the lesson all the time so they just dont do the work, but with this tool in the class room the computer would see that the student is not understanding and will change the lesson so thst eveyone gets it and is on task doing there work.
I dont feel that this should be used for anything else but to read students emotional expressions in class. This is helpful to the teacher aswell because not all the time do they see the ones that are not understanding what is going on because as long as most of the students are getting the esson they don't see the one's who are not. Most students who dont understand the work will not say anything and just sit there and look like they know what is going on but don't. So this will be good for picking them out so that they can get all the help they need. This is also good for when a teacher might feel like noone gets the work because of how the class looks even though they all understand it they just dont look like it the computer would let the teacher know that everyone is fine with the work and understands it.
In conclusion i do feel that this new technology would be good for all schools and that it would be a big help. | 2 |
Join the seagoing cowboys you will be able to help other people. Sometimes you can sea cool animals or take tours of old castles and ruins on your way to the drop point. You can find new freinds and traditions from the other seacow boys. If you get board we play games after the animals have been droped of we play games like table tennis tournaments or voly ball baseball fencing boxing and reading and righting games help him pass the time. The trips can be dangerous if your watching the catle at night.
Its a once in a life time event. Have you ever been to Japan or China. No, will if you join the seagoing cowboy you will. If you have never gone boxing or play the games listed in the first paragragh you will. Plus you will get to help people in need. The trip can be dangerous just be carful going up the latter and make sure it is dry when is raining.
The trip can be dangerous if you are not carful. Playng game can help pass the time. Finding new freinds and triditions isn't hard. The sites are amazingly cool. So will you join the seagoning cowboy? | 1 |
In todays society driving or riding in a car is a completely normal activity. You drive to school, work, extracurricular activities, social gatherings, and everything else that doesnt happen in your own home. Cars are a part of everyday life.
What if I told you that there a cities that are banning car usage? Vauban in Germany is a suburb that has given up cars. Paris banned driving for a few days to reduce smog. Bogata, Columbia initiated an annual "car-free day." Cities all over the world are giving up cars and looking to other forms of transportation. So why limit car usage? Well, the usage of cars produces O-zone harming greenhouse gass emissions, smog, traffic jams, and adds stress to the our everyday lives.
A large amount of the harmful greenhouse gas emissisions that surround the earth come directly from cars. According to source 1 "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States." By ending the use of even a fraction of our car usage we would drastically improve the amount of gas emissions produced. This improvement would mean healthier air and a healthier O-zone.
In Paris, France pollution and smog is a big problem. Source 2 states that Paris has much more smog than other European capital cities. "Paris had 147 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic meter compared with 114 in Brussels and 79.7 in london." Because of this intense smog Paris created a partial driving ban policy to help clear and clean the city air. The policy stated that on Monday vehicles with an even-mumbered lincense plate would have to leave their cars at their home or be issued a 22-euro fine. The next day this rule would apply to odd-numbered licence plates. As a result to this partial ban the city smog and congestion levels decreased by 60 percent. Even this partial change benefited the city greatly by reducing smog and poor air quality.
One growing trend in some cities in South America is "car-free day." Source 3 describes how "cars have been banned with only buses and taxis permitted." The objective of this day is to enchorage the usage of public transportation. This day was "a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution" according to one businessman by the name of Carlos Arturo Plaza. He is right. Cars are an added stress to a busy day. While driving there is a constant fear of being involved in an accident, getting lost, popping a tire, or having your car break down. There is also the nuisance of heavy stop-and-go traffic, bad drivers, and uncooperative lights. When the amount of cars on the road is reduced there are less bad drivers, less traffic jams, and less stress. That also means that safety is improved so there are less accidents.
By limiting their car usage many cities have improved their enviroments and their lives. In all these cities greenhous gas levels are reduced, the smog levels in Paris have fallen, safety in these cities has improved, and the stress of transportation has become less of an issue. With all of these advantages is there really a question why these cities have been limiting car usage? When you think about the advantages of reducing private transportation these vehicle bans make perfect sense. | 3 |
In 1976 NASA found an interesting sight on Mars, a giant face! It shocked the mission controllers and when it was released to the public, it sent people buzzing. Theorists said that the "face" was made by aliens but NASA disagred.
After the Viking photos, NASA made getting better photographs of the face a priority. In April of 1998, the Mars Global Surveyer (MGS) reached Cydonia and got a picture of the face. "... snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking Photos." The photo then revealed that the face was no more than a natural landform. But, theorists said that there could have been markings that the Mars clouds blocked out. So in 2001, they attempted again with thier best resolution and once again found that it was just a natural structure.
I can see why theorists would say the face was made by aliens because it was really life like and acurate to a human face.
They discovered that it looked a lot like a mesa or a butte. Jim Garvin expllains that, "It reminds me of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho." and "That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars." | 1 |
One thing that robots have never been able to do is having emotions. The Facial Action Coding System can provide a new opportunity for emotions to be incorparated into technology. The software allows for computers to read emotions on human's faces and interpret that data. In a classroom, this software can be extremely valuable to educators.
The use of the Facial Action Coding System in the classroom can prove to be an extremely powerful tool to educators, as long as it is used in moderation. An educator could use the tool during a lesson to make sure students are engaged, and if a student is bored, the teacher could adjust the lesson plan for that student. The teacher would also know when to help students if the machine is reading them as confused. However, the technology should not replace a teacher in the classroom, as Dr. Huang Suggest, "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor" (D'Alto). The software can read the emotions, but it can't provide it's own emotions or give the same one-on-one connection a teacher can to help a student. The FACS (Facial Action Coding System) should not be used as a teacher, but by a teacher, so as to help every student get the most out of their education.
While this new technology can be a fantastic tool, if not used properly, it could have a terriblle outcome. The machine can read a face and give percents of emotions someone is feeling, as shown in the first paragraph, "She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry" (D'Alto). However, if humans start using this software constantly, it might begin to replace our own emotion reading skills. However, the ability of the software to detect certain muscle movements associated with faking a smile and other complex emotions, can prove extremely useful in a school. Educators can usually read emotions pretty well, but when a face shows mixed emotions and a student is trying to hide some of them, this system could help a teacher understand what's going through a student's head.
The Facial Action Coding System is a huge leap in computer and human interaction. Used carefully, this software can allow for teachers to be even more engaged in their students and know how each person is doing with a lesson. This technology is very valuable to the classroom and should be implemented to benefit student's education and to further our knowledge of emotions. | 3 |
Why do we vote? We vote so we can choose a candidate that we can trust to make the best decisions for our country. But what's the point of voting if we have an Electoral College. We are not actually voting to ellect a president, we are voting for electors, who elect the president. The Elecotral College should be shut down, because everyone should have their right to vote for who they they want to vote for, not have electors do it for them.
"Over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now." This shows that more than half the voters, would rather just vote the president instead of having the Electoral College do it for them. "This year voters can expect another close election in which the popular vote winner could again lose the presidency." This means that the President who gets the most popular votes is less likely to win over the electors votes. It seems like the electors are never agreeing with people's votes because, usually the popular vote never wins. But the Electoral College should stay up for certain reasons.
"The Electoral College restores some of the weight in the political balance that large states (by population) lose by virtue of the mal-apportionment of the Senate decreed in the Constitution." The Electoral College helps with a certain percentage of people who aren't giving the best decisions on the candidate they are choosing. But that still doesn't mean that people shouldn't have their right to vote for who they think is best candidate. It should be the people's decision on who they want to vote for, not the electors. There would be no reason to vote if the people's vote don't really mean anything.
People should have their right to vote for who they think is best. That is why people are given the right to vote. The Electoral College just takes that right away. Presidents who win because of electoral votes, are not fairly chosen because, not many voters agreed on him, the electors did. The candidate that won popular votes, should be President, because most people agree on him and his choices. Let the people's votes count toward presidency. | 2 |
I think that this system that they are creating will be useful in the classroom because if a student is confused then the computer can recognize that so that the perticular student may be helped to learn the lesson. In the article it states that "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, Dr. Huang predicts. Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor. this shows how the syetem can be used for good in a classroom and help kids who may have learning disabillites have an easier time understanding the lesson and learning more.
Another reason that this system can be useful in the classroom is it could make a computer animated faces have more expression so say the lesson the student is learning is online using an animated instructor the system would code the instructors face to have more expression when explaining the lesson leading the the student to learn more aprehensivly. In the Article is says that "The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressivefor video games or video surgery. Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication, notes Dr. Huang. So computers need to understand that, too." this shows how it can makes animated faces have more expressions such in Video games, Video surgeries, and classroom lesson.
This essay shows how the FACS (Facial Action Coding System) can be useful in a classroom and to better the future of our students and schools. | 2 |
In this essay in the article " Making Mona Lisa Smile" the author describes how a new technology called the Facial Action Coding System I was talking about how are the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable.
First on that time some computers are creating to recognice emotions, in the text say, " Mono Lisa at least acccording to some new computer software that can recognize emotions." She was according that she wanted to find ways to humans express they emotions, but later the Dr. Huang was developed a betters ways to humans can be communicate with others. In the text say, " Dr. Huag and his colleague are experts at developing better ways for humas and computers to communicate" this mean that the Dr. Huag he is trying to find how calculate the feelings of humans and he is a expert at developing a computers that way people will be have how they communicate with others to the place and another pleace.
In addition this process begins with a cumputer 3-D this was called an " action unit" this is how they is trying to find how are the humans emotions. The Dr. Paul Eckman was a creator the FACS ( Facial Action Coding System) he creater this, then he classified whats are the emotions that he is trying to has. In the text say, Eckman has classified six basic emotions happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness and then associated each with characteristic of the facial muscle." This mean how the Dr. Paul uses this six category to see how the students express their emotions. I think that this is help us because they know when the students are sad, fear, happy , anger or samething like the Dr. Paul saids. These emotions is classified to find the emotions of people.
Now the new emotion they use in people and then they compare with the real face , in the article say, " Using video imagery, the new emtion-recognition software tracks these facial movements in a real face or in the painted face of Mona Lisa," and " Each expression is compared against a neutral face" they use videos imagery to show the emotions when they use the creation that they creater to see how are the ractions, and then they compared against the neutral face with the face that they have.
Also there is a lot ways that they have to use in emtions but not all the ways are express the same ways. Some ways that they use are bad beacuse some humans don't wanted that people know their life and another humans wanted that they help them to find their emotions because they don't know how they feel or how are their emotions.
When they uses with students is so confused for them. Students is becoming confused how Dr. Huag predicts, in the article say, " A classroom computer could recognized when a student is becoming confused or bored," Dr. Haug predicts. " Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." The same make computer-animated faces more expressive for video games or video surgery. " Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication," this mean that for some students are boring but fr the others students are good and they used one and other ways to recognize the emotions and finally they found and they know when the students used a lot the computers to compared animated face or something like that.
In conclusion I learn that they are different ways to humans express their emotions that is hard for the Drs. to find the emotions for recognize how humans feeling. Also this ways a lot of students use to compared their emotions with someone else. | 1 |
In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents adequately well. The author uses factual information and describes some of the reasons why studying Venus would be rewarding. The author states "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system" in paragraph 4. By including the information from the quote above, the author allows the reader to understand why studying Venus would be beneficial and crucial for further planetary study. The author also states a feasible idea that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) thought of for studying Venus in the following quote "The National Aeronatics and Space Administration (NASA) has one particular idea for sending humans to study Venus." in Paragraph 5. The author then continues to explain the idea, which can be possibly sucessful and would allow for Venus to be studied. Through the explanation of this idea, the author shows that despite the dangers presented Venus can still be studied safely. The author concludes the article with the following quote "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." from paragraph 8. This statement is tenaciously powerful in that it empowers the reader to not be afraid of the dangers and doubts presented by studying Venus, but rather be inspired to think of solutions to overcome the said dangers and doubts. All in all, because of the factual information and examples of ways to study Venus, the author argued the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents very well. | 1 |
germany,paris,columbia and now the usa have begun to cut back ob their vehichle emmissions. why?
To reduce the amount of greenhouse gases produced by their countries.
no cars in germany? vaubaun germany is a new upscale community on the edge of the french and swiss border. recently completed in 2006 whats so special you might ask?
theres little no no cars in this new community.
according to the article "
in german suburb, life goes on with out cars
" written by: elisabeth rosenthanl.
"70 percent of vaubans families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold a car to move here."
thsi effort is being used to try and reduce the 12 pecent of green house gas prouced by europ alone.
in vauban people crowd the sidwalks, kis playing in the streets, and the people that do want to own a car have to pay a cool $40,000.00. and there cars are not even kept in their houses.
in another european country close by, paris is also trying to cut down its green house gas emisoms.
in the article "
paris bans driving due to smog
" it tells how france is also taking action to reduce its green house gases.
the article reads "after days of near-record pollution, paris enforces a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city."
anyone who had an odd numberd tag on one of the days and was cought driving would get a $31 ticket. and revers for the even numberd tags on the next day. so the cars took turns driving. meaning there would be less cars on the street on those certain days.
according to the article over 4,000 people were fined, and 27 people had their cars impounded. it might sound stupid but whe your trying to save the world its a small price to pay.
bogota columbia also joins the fight against greenhouse gases.
"
car free day spinning into a big hit in bogota
" by Andrew selsky tells the story of just one day that people in bogota neglected to use cars.
" millions of colombians hiked,biked,skated, or took buses to work during a car free day yesterday, leaving the streets of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams. it was the third straight year cars have been banned and taxis permitted for the days without cars in this capital city of 7 million. the goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. violators faced $25 fines."
bogota columbia has been doing this now for over 3 years, meaning that they are actually cutting down on there green house gas emissions.
not even the rainly days of columbia stopped the participants of this now yearly event. the participants are not only held to bogota, recently cali and valledupar also joined the even.
this 1 day with out cars has been in place sinc the 1990's.
the article "
the end of car culture
" tells how americans are driving less and how less and less people are buying cars, and how les greenhouse gas is being emmitioned.
lastly its tells how president obama gave a speach on greenhouse gases. | 0 |
If you could join the program would you? I would join the program because of site seeing, help many people and animals in need, and to interacte with different animals from across the world.
During your daring trips around the world you visit places like Europe and China or any where else. You may incounter many people living in that area and experience the culture and foods. Just like when luke marveled at the Panama Canal. There are many famous places around the world and you could see many of them that not a lot of people see in their life time.
Many people across the world need a lot of help due to disasters that has happened to theemor in their country. Also the animals and not just the humans need our help because they are important creatures to this world.
And when out in some country helping you could have to take care of many types of animals that live there, and that you may have never seen before.
In concluson you should join the program because of site seeing, help people from across the gloab, and the chance to interacte with many animals. So in the future if you have the chance to join i'm telling you to. | 1 |
Now you may have heard of something on Mars that looked like a huge rock formation. You may have thought it was created by aliens, but here at NASA I am here to tell you that it's just a mesa.
Well in 1976 we discovered something on Mars that looked like a face! At first we thought it was something like what you think now, we thought it was aliens. The excitement was short lived for us because we ended up saying that "Scientists figured it was just another Martian mesa" so that made it disappointing for us. You may say that the landform is created by aliens and we're just hiding it from you, but you're sorely mistaken because this discovery would help NASA as a whole if we did reveal it. That's just one of many reasons that we aren't lying about it being a landform.
Another reason that we are completely sure it's a landform is because we can't spot any sign of life on the face. As we said "As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size," "So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!" So even if you thought we were lying saying "Oh this image is a lie they have secret ones that actually show that there's life on Mars in their building," you would have no clue that there's no reason for us to hide life being on Mars. We wouldn't have anything bad happen to us because we discovered life on Mars we would get rewarded for discovering life on Mars so why would we hide it?
And the last reason is that we have factual evidence and credibility to back up that there's no life on Mars. Like we said during this speech we said that "And so on April 5, 1998, when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing... a natural landform." Later on we did it again in the speech "Nevertheless, on April 8, 2001- a cloudless summer day in Cydonia- Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look. "We had to roll the spacecraft 25 degrees to center the Face in the field of view," Said Garving. "Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution." "Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo." Now you may say that we never did that, but we have photographic evidence of that clear photo that lets you see everything on the face. So we have the evidence we need to prove that this photo is real.
All together we have the proof that this special land formation on Mars that may look like aliens have built it, but it's just a simple mesa here on Earth something so common. | 3 |
What do i think about the advantages of limiting car usage? My opinion is that i really dont think its true about how our driving population is accelerating at all! I mean just think about it! We use our vehicles on the daily basis, just so that we can get where we need to be at times,right? I believe that this is something ridiculous just so that they can make a profit out of something like this.
Not only Americans have been buying vehicels,So has people from other countries. Some countries move to America. The number increases on how much Americans buy cars and the numbers increases everyday. Imagine how many people are buying a vehicel right now around America! It keeps going up!
Even though the percentage of 16 to 39 year old getting a license,While people are likely to retain their licenses as they age does not mean the population will get bigger. I believe that their will be a 90% chance that it will not accelerate.
Whether members of the millennial generation will start buying more cars once they have kids to take them to a soccer practice and school plays remains an open question. But such as projections have important busniess implications,even if car buyers are merely older or buying fewer cars in lifetime rather than rejecting car culture outright.
What intrigues the people who have their own car company such as Hondas,Fords,Lexus,etc. They care too much about the rates of car ownerships per household and per person started to come down 2 or 3 years before the downturn which Michael Sivak who studies the trend in cars and eho is a research professor at the University of Michigan's Transportation Research Institute. Michael thought that something more good and fundamental is going to happen! | 1 |
In the generation we are living in today cars are a huge part of our everyday lives. Whether it's going to school/work, hanging with friends or anywhere really; people rely on their cars for everything and you never hear anyone talk about walking, biking and taking another way of transportation. It's whole new era with how are society is created and working but it's how we are living, and it seems to be working. Elisabeth Rosenthal, Robert Duffer, and Andrew Selsky all have the same mindset when talking about cars; while each are talking about a different reason to decrease car usage, they all have a common interest in wanting it to be implied or simply like how it is being enforced. So after reading very specific, factual, and information articles I now know the advantages of limiting car usage and that is to save time and businesses, conserve resources, and having a vast decrease in car culture.
Imagine yourself on a bad morning, you woke you late and you're probably rushing out the door for work, and as a fellow American I would know that there is early morning traffic no matter where you are headed. But if you didn't use a car and maybe walked or rode a bike you could easily get there faster if it was a reasonable distance. "In a program that's set to spread to other countries, millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during a car-free day yesterday, leaving the streets fo this capital city eerily to devoid of traffic jams" (Selsky, par 20). This goes to show that when people took other steps to get to work instead of cars that there was no traffic jams. Which means no waitng which also means getting to work at a normal time, or for some, even on time. When you think about it you know that the roads can be a really busy and hetic place to be if you time it just right, so if you take the extra measure and maybe walk home you can easily make faster time and not just that but it helps the environment. Now another advantage of not using cars is businesses start to flourish. "Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks; rush- hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic; and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up" (Selsky, par 28). Since many people have decided not to use their cars they walk or bike and that can lead to going to places near by which would mean they see more of their city than they did in a car. More eyes are to catch businesses and they find themselves walking into a store because they aren't rushed and/or it might just look intersting which is a huge benefit for companies.
Secondly, another advantage on limiting car usage would be conserving resources. This is a very major step when it comes to the environment and things like these should be enforced for a greener Earth. "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States" (Rosenthal, par 5). This is damaging our Earth and the only to prevent it is to limit your car use. Because how it's happening and how it's polluting our Earth is from the cars tailpipes when it releases the exhaust. Due to this hazardly problem laws are starting to be made to limit the use. Towns and cities have tried to come up with a no-driving day to decrease the use and help the environment, and in many cases it has worked while in some, it hasn't. "After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city" (Duffer, par 10). In effect to this 'experiment' it is shown that this way of thinking had changed Paris; pollution decreased and congestion in traffic was down and the smog that was being created by cars had stopped the next couple of days. It's unbelievable to know what can happen when you limit yourself.
Finally, it is clear that there is a decrease in car culture. There have been recent studies that imply that more Americans aren't driving or just plain out don't want to get their licenses. "A study last year found that driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009..." (Rosenthal, par 41). We aren't really understanding as to why this is happening. Maybe it's because they are afraid of getting a ticket, their parents haven't allowed it, they are against pollution- it's not known. But what we do know is that yes, it's saving the environment but it's hurting the car businesses. "If the pattern presists- and many sociologists believe it will have a beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment, since transportation is the second largest source of America's emission, just behind power plants" (Rosenthal, par 34). Yes, this is going to increasingly better our enivornment by not having more cars on the road to pollute, but it will for sure hurt the car industry. Not many people even have the money to go out a buy a car in this economy. And from the car businesses in ruins, some are even rebranding themselves. The change in car culture is known for much less commuting due to technology as well.
Lastly, a reminder of the advantages in limiting car usage are saving time and businesses, conserving resources and a decrease in car culture. So when you're on the road, start thinking about ways to stop your use of cars and see how it would benefit the environment; cause the more we drive around the worse our Earth will become. | 4 |
The idea of cars that can drive themselves is truly fascinating. Just being able to sit back and relax while a car takes you to your destination sounds incredible. But a question that must be asked is: Will these driverless cars be 100% safe? Though the idea sounds cool, I personally am against the development of driverless cars because they may not be completely safe, and they also will lead to laziness and inattentiveness.
The first and most important reason that driverless cars should be made with caution is the possibility of them being unsafe. If these driverless cars require human assistance in some situations, then humans need to be paying attention at all times. In the article the author mentions that cars will be coming out that are supposed to be driverless 90% of the time. This is worrisome because humans are likely to get bored the 90% of the time they aren't driving, and may not be ready to take over in a sudden hazardous situation if they haven't been paying attention, which could result in disaster. If these cars require drivers to be focused on the road, than in my opinion they are pointless. If drivers have to stay focused anyway, why not just have them control the car at all times? If driverless cars will never be able to handle any situation, than they are pointless to pursue.
The second reason I think driverless cars shouldn't be developed is that people would use the time they would normally spend driving, distracted. People would use their phones, watch television, or play games, instead of being attentive and using their brain. These driverless cars would lead humans to be even more lazy than they already are. Driving is a way to exercise your brain, and most people do it every day. In a future of only driverless cars, people would miss out on the daily opportunities do mentally exercise by driving.
It has yet to be seen if these proposed driverless cars will become reality. Personally, I think driving is fun, and I wouldn't be thrilled to see a future where everyone sits in their cars preoccupied with their phone or some other electronics, while they are shuttled to their destination. | 3 |
The author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents very well. He used many ideas to support his claim including what others think, facts, and his own thoughts.
The text states "while Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth, it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely (p1)," pointing out the challenge of exploring Venus. The author also states "humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world. Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades. Numerous factors contribute to Venus's reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study, despite its proximity to us (p2)," telling us how dangerous Venus is. He also states "a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Farenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals. Also notable, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun. Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface (p3)," pointing out the dangerous gases, pressure, temperature, and natural disasters of Venus.
"If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface (p4)?" The author states "often referred to as Earth's "twin," Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too (p2)," meaning that Venus would be the fastest planet to travel to. He also said "astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system (p4)," meaning it could truly be a future habitat for the living - and may have been inhabited once. The author also said "long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth. Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters (p4)," suggesting that Venus may have truly been Earth's "twin." He also mentioned that NASA has a compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus in a blimp-like structure (p5), which could work. The text stated "striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation (p8)," suggesting that finding a way to safely allow humans to travel to Venus will not only help us learn more about the most dangerous planet, but also will lead us to more exciting and intimidating endeavors. Not only that, but traveling to Venus will make us no longer be limited by dangers and doubts, allowing us to expand our minds.
To sum everything up, the author did well with supporting his idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. He mentioned many dangers that Venus has. He also mentioned possible solutions to the problems Venus throws at us and reasons why Venus is worth studying, using facts and thoughts as support for his claim. | 3 |
The face on the moon is just a rock that gives an illusion to the human eye. The face had become popular and eveyone was talking about it. It appeared on Hollywood films, books, magazines, radio talk shows, and even the haunted grocery store for 25 years.
The face is on the planet Mars and other people thought it was a face of an alien of some kind. They thought that because it looked like it had a nose,pair of eyes, and a mouth. The first picture of the face on mars was in 1976 which is called the Viking photo. The second was taken by Mars Global surveyor (MGS) form 1998. Finally, the third image was the latest image from MGS in 2001.
A few scientists believed it was an alien artifact, photographing Cydonia became a priority for NASA when Mars MGS arrived at the Red Planet inseptember 1997, eighteen long years after the Viking missions ended. April 5,1998 MGS flew over Cydonia for the first time. Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL website, revealing a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all.
The Face on Mars is located at 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was winter April '98, a cloudy time of the year on the Red Planet. The camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the Face. Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze.
What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa landforms common around the American West. It reminds Jim Garvin most of Middle Butte in the Snake River. The Face on Mars became very popular and showed on many events like the television, newspaper articles, books, and the checkout area in grocery stores for 25 years. | 1 |
Yes or No to Understanding
Have you ever been told that you woulden't understand you don't know how I feel or what I been threw. Now what if I could tell you how to know how they felt would it help? There has been a new development recently with how to tell what the person is feeling anger, sadness, happy, confused.
The list could go on it has the ability to tell the mixed emotions and give you a percent of each emotion. Thomas Huang, of the insitute of Beckman with Prof. Nicu Sebe of the Univesity of Amsterdam.
These two and there other colleges worked hard to make the only working Facial Action Coding System. which can tell you how another or even yourself are feeling you might not know exacly what the other has been threw but its a start. They have been testing this software on people and a well known painting you might have heard of made by Leonardo da Vinci.
The painting if you haven't already guessed it is the Mona Lisa Smile. Who was 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry. You might be thinking can this really calculate your emotions also how could it tell.
The program starts by scaning your face and makes a 3-D model. Then it moves the model's 44 major muscles in your face accordingly to mach yours. then it would relies on psychologists Dr. Paul Eckman the creator of FACS work to classify it into the six main emotions "happyness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness".
Compare it to a natural face it is classified into the different groups unmixing the mixed emotions. What do you think about it would you want this to be a normal thing in schools work or at home.
In my opinion no there is a lot of practical use for the FACS but it could lead to a number of negative events. This is a choice based on pros and cons with tecnology getting to be this advanced it's getting a lot more dangerus/////. What are your thoughts? | 0 |
The main reason car usage should be limited is the pollution it causes. The emission given off from the cars cause massive amounts of polution.
Smog causes layes of emission to be trappen in Earths atmosphere and cause problems with breathing when unhealthy air is breathed in. The emission released from a car causes a huge affect on the atmosphere. We have to be limited on our usage or a few years from now our will not be able to be taken in at all without being sick!
There are many ways to reduce the usage of cars. We can ride bikes,carpool,or take public transportation. With us using less cars we will be able to slow down the rate at which car emissions are being released into the air.
Everyone needs to begin to stop and think if cars are really nessasary in their lives. Can you carpool with a friend? Does the public transportation run in your area and on your route to work or school? We are getting to the point where we have to limit driving all together so that we can still have healthy air to live. Would it be worth it when you are dead? I dont think so.
Now cars are begining to be eletric so that they dont let out as much emission from the car. With the eletric cars we are able to go to work and know we using half as much gas and the emission being let off is not nearly as much if we were to be driving a normal gas powered car. Eletric cars allow us to know that not as much damage is being done to our enviorment.
So get out there and start walking, riding a bike with a friend, or carpool ! Don't let cars be the death of us! We can save the Earth starting with taking well trips in the car and start taking the two foot express! | 1 |
The author supports this idea by throwing in little things like proof and trying to convince you to study Venus is a worthyu pursuit despite the dangers .He also used NASA the text says " NASA is working on other approaches to studing venus." thernhe gives us an example ssome simplifed electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the condtions. the text says. the text also states "Many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contibute meanninhfully to our knowledge of venus"
Thats so when can have the infomation for anybody eals that wants to know about it. and they are working on simpifed electoronics so we can acess venus alot easyer and the stuff to make it wont be hard to find. And the texts states NASA's possible soution to the hostiile conditing on the sufface of venus would allow scientists to flot above the fray. So they are thinking about sending humans to venus also but they tell us the ups and downs to that how they would the flot to the face of it and how they have to convies people to go up there. Over all The Author did very good at supporting his idea by throwing in NASA facts and telling us about the things there working to get up to venus and hoe they plan on sending humans uo there to. Any why we should keep on studying venus. | 1 |
Driverless cars seems like a futuristic thing that should be happening decades from now. But it is possible for it to happen soon. Maybe not completely driverless since the smart cars are going to be able to need the driver's alert. Driverless cars can be a very big change to the world.
Sergey Brin, Google cofounder, envisions a future that will be able to have a public-transport taxi system with driverless cars. The cars he imagines to be able to happen in the future would use half the fuel of today's taxis. And would be able to offer much more flexibility than a bus could. Sergey Bin says that this could fundamentally change the world.
Google has had cars that could independently drive themselves since 2009 according to the article. Google's cars aren't truly independent because they still require a driver to take over under certain conditions like pulling in and out of driveways, dealing with the complicated traffic issues, or navigating through any accidents on the road.
The self driving cars from Google have driven more than half a million miles without a crash. Safety will be soemthing very important for the driverless cars if these were to happen. Car crashes happen oftenly among adults and teenagers that have the opportunity to drive. The causes for the accidents are mostly because people often wnat to be using their mobile devices while on the road. Texting is a problem while driving. It will obviously distract you from watching the road and cause you to be in an accident or just cause one. Manufacturers are hoping to be able to put cameras into the driverless cars so it makes sure that the person taking over the car is watching the road, and car is watching over the person so they can be alert when they have to take over.
Driverless cars seems like a good idea. It can make a big change to the world. Half the fuel can be used which is a good thing since the fuel from cars harms the earth since it causes greenhouse gases. With less fuel being used, the greenhouse gases can be avoided less. Driverless cars can bring upon much more safety since the cars Google has, have driven more than half a million miles without an accident. Which is good since accidents will be less likely to happen with these driverless cars. | 2 |
I read the article the challengenge of exploring is talk about the sun and star and it was said that everning star is one of the brightest points of the light in the night sky and is also said making it simple for ever an amoteur stargazer to spot. nickname is misleading since venus is actually a planet
in our aolar system venus is the second planet from our sun.
it also said venus is the closest to earth in terms of density and size and occasionally the closest in distance too. earth venus and mars our other planetsry
neighbor orbit the sun at different speed.
it tallk about how earth beging and how earth closest to the sun and other plants and its talk about how NASA send humans to study venus and it also talk about the national aeronautiecs and space administration.
NASA
is working onm other approaches to studying venus and they working on the veuns
surface and ahve lasted for three weeks in such conditions and is alson talk about the project is looking back to an old technology called mechanical
computers. | 0 |
Cars are one of the main causes of air pollution is the United States and the world. If everyone would limit their car usage, one would see all the great benefits of not using a car as much. Limiting car usage helps keep our planet clean and people would be a lot happier.
To begin with limiting car usage would help keep our plant clean. In the article, "Paris bans driving due to smog", the author, Duffer, states "After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." After this ban was enforced Paris' air was cleared in a less than a week. This proves that one doesn't even have to limit their car usage a lot, even just a little bit helps. In the article, "The End of Car Culture", the author, Rosenthal, claims that Bill Ford, chairman of the Ford Motor Company, wants to create cities in which "pedestrain, bicycle, private cars, commerical and public transportatons traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lowers emmissions and improve safety." This shows that even Bill Ford, the chairman of FORD MOTOR COMPANY, even agrees that limiting car usage would help lower global pollution.
On another hand, limiting car usage makes people a lot happier. In the article, "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars", the author, Rosenthal, states "'When i had a car i was always tense. I'm much happier this way,' said Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two...." A normal person, a person like everyone else, claims that they're happier without a car, less stressful, imagine what just limiting your car usage would do. In the article, "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota", the author, Selsky, says "'It's a good oppurtunity to take away stress and lower air pollution,' said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as her rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife." This shows that limiting car usage for just a day, takes away stress and helps the planet. Wouldn't it be nice to have a stress-free day?
In conclusion, limiting car usage, even just a little, reduces pollution and causes happiness. One can help themselves, while also helping the planet. | 3 |
My opinion on driverless cars is that i dont think
they are a good idea because some people enjoy driving, like me for example i have never gotten the chance to drive but i would really like too. If they were make driverless cars i might have to "wait my turn". Which means that when the car decides that it can't handle it anymore its going to make me drive it. I would like to drive the car at all times like it says in the article." the google simple announces when the driver should be ready to take over.
The idea of a driverless cars just make me want to know why someone would think of this i mean if you have a driverless car it ,ight toose funiction at anytime, and the driverless cars is basically all technology which mean it would malfunction at anytime just like your computure, or phone. A driverless car is a danger to society because so may things can go wrong with it. A driverless car could cause a big accedint if something goes wrong with it when its in motion.
If your cellphone or computer needs to be traded out every two years would it be the same with a car? I mean if the car starts doing things that could put people in dantger is it going to be bad.If there was to be in accedint would it be the cars fault or the drivers fault? If the car was in an accedint some people might say that it was the cars fault they might lie and try to sew whoever made the car.like it says in the article " who is at fault the driver ot the manufactuer. No one would know so i think that the car is a bad idea.
The car might also have a positive effect like somepeople like to text and drive like they have an addiction to there phone. If someone decides that they want to send a text messege while driving they wouldn't be driving and i thyink that thats pretty cool. If tyhe cars would be invented would textuing and driving still be illegel? Cops wouldn't be able to pull you over because you weren't driving i also think that is pretty cool. That is my opinion on the driverless car. | 3 |
People think that driveless cars are dangerous and technology is taking over our society.
Driveless cars are the next big creation for our society and believe it or not the cars have more than one one positve of the car being driveless.
The driveless cars are more safe then other cars, allow more technology, and assists the driver.
Starting with television and movies have been fascinated with cars that could drive themselves, and today companies like Google are trying to make that possible.
Having a driveless car is safe than a regular car because their are because they have taken advantage of the technology they have been given.
Google has modified the Toyota Prius by using the postion-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel that can help drivers see where their backing into and prevent the accident of hitting another car or anything.Most of the features are being tested to make it as safe as possible for the car and the driver behind the wheel.
Driveless cars are very advanced in technology, and is getting better over time. The first question after the option of amrter roads became more too expensive to be practical was, "how much smarter did the cars have to be?"
The first conclusion was that the car needed alot of sensors inside and out of the car.
They began by placing estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, four automotive radar sensors, and a inertial motion sensor.
The purpose of all the sensors are to pu the driver and the car in the safest position at all times.
The car also includes a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror to be able see the surrounds when they are backing up.
Futhermore the must have such as the GPS keeping America from getting lost.
The combination of all theses aspects is necessary for the driverless car to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel with technology.
Another question about the driverless car "is it driving or assisting the person behind the wheel?"
The driverless car is assisting the drivers because they is no way the car could be able to drive under every circumstance with out assists.
Aspects such as the antilock breaks assist people throughout their eveyday life.
In 2013, BMW announced the developement of the "Traffic Jam Assistant."
The Traffic Jam Assistant can assist with driving functions at a speed up to 25 mph.
The GM has developed driver's seats that vibrate when the vechile is in danger assistting preventing acciedents to happen.
The driverless car is the future in the technology of cars and will help benfit use greatly.
The driveless car just has to improve and finalize that the car is safe then the car will be on the road in no time. The driverless cars are more safe then other cars, allow more tchnology, and assist the driver. | 1 |
The Face on Mars is just a landmark. I can tell you this because you can't believe anybody that has no evidence, NASA won't even leak anything, and if NASA will not tell anybody anything then everyone is just assuming.
You can't believe anybody that has no real evidence. In paragraph five it says that "evidence that NASA would rather have." That shows that NASA doesn't want to say to anybody that is assuming that this is created by aliens because they really want this to be confidential. People thing the face is evidence of life on Mars and the Face is bona fide so they are saying there has to be life on Mars. In reality they don't know what they are saying so they are assuming that this was created by aliens just to start talk and give people something to talk about. This is evidence of why you can't believe anything without true evidence.
NASA won't even leak anything. Some people think that Face is bona fide and that shows there are aliens on Mars. Nobody knows is that is true because if you read the paragraph it says some people think and everyone is believing what people think. THe story has been around for about the Face on Mars and it's bween everywhere for about 25 years and after a while of the story people started to say things that are not real mixed in with real things and people have just been going around like that. This is evidence of why NASA won't leak anything so people do not know the truth.
If NASA won't leak anything then everyone is just assumimg. "The Face on Mars has starred in a hollywood film, appeared in books, magazines, radio talk shows, and even haunted grocery store checkout lines for 25 years." It has been in movies okay and they change it up a little bit to make it interesting and people think that is the true story. NASA wishes there was ancient civilization background on Mars so they know the full details. NASA doesn't even know the full story of the The Face, so how can people be for sure about anything. These are examples of why people are just assuming.
People think it is a face that aliens put on there. So you are saying if I go out to the middle of the desert and see a face it camre from aliens. It is a natural landmark that came with the planet of Mars. NASA is not even telling people so no one even knows for sure anyways.
You can't believe anybody that has no evidence, NASA won't even leak anything, and if NASA will not tell anybody anything then everyone is just assuming. This is why this is just a landmark. There is a lot of landmarks on earth and this is one of them on Mars. There is no evidence of any of this so don't believe what everybody says. | 2 |
Senator, we should keep the Electoral College. The Electoral College establishes judgement and fairness by giving upcoming presidents a fair shot. People have voices and the popular vote can be biased from state to state. The proccess if mature because they chose unbiased electors, and there is a majority of 270 electoral votes. The Electoral College has 538 electors, which gives a good amount of unbiases people. They figure this amount by one for each member in the House of Representaties plus two for the Senators, which you could be one.
The Electoral College is one of the best ways to keep a fair election. We people do not make the brightest decisions sometimes, and the Electoral College keeps us from making the wrong decision for who is going to be our next president.
People can be easily affected into turning on a candidate. They could not realize that the candidate would be a great president. The Electoral College gives the candidates a fair chance. The member of the Electoral College are fair and know what is best for the country. The specific Electoral electors for your state vote what the state wants, and is not biased on what other senators or electors want. This gives the people a good amount of say in the election.
Electoral Colllege keeps the people in line and gives the people a sense of establishment. The election of the president is every four years. This gives people time to decide on a new president and who they want representing their votes. Overall the Electoral College is one of the brightest decisions that America has made. For one the Electoral College gives people a fair chance in becoming president. Also the Electoral College helps make the voting process a lot easier.
We people don't yet understand why there are not more people realizing that there is an Electoral College, and what underlies is a great idea and even a better reality . | 2 |
Imagine being a teacher and having to create lessons that will keep your students interested. It can be difficult because you never know how students really feel. The technology, called the Facial Action Coding System, would be really valuable in the classroom. This technology is useful because it can make learning more personlized for students and can help teachers know what mood a student is in.
This technology can be valuable for a few reasons. Here is one of them; The Facial Action Coding system can make the class and lesson more personalized for a student. In the text, it states that a classroom computer would be able to recognize when a student is confused or bored. From that observation, the computer can modify the lesson to fit the students' interests. If the student is interested in what he or she is learning, then they will be fully focused on their work and in the long run, their grades will be better. As a student, I know that when I'm confused, uninterested, or bored in a class, I can't put my best effort into the work that I do. With this technology, students will thrive in their academic life and actually enjoy getting an education.
Another reason this technology can be valuable is that teachers can be able to find out what mood their students are in. If they're teaching and they see that most students aren't interested with the lesson, they can switch up their lesson to make it more exciting for the students. This technology can, in a way, bring students and teachers closer together, by being able to read emotions. If a child is upset or in a bad mood, the teacher will know and then can handle the situation properly. In the text, it talks about how this system can detect fake emotion, along with your actual emotions. This can be valuable in the classroom because as a student, I tend to put on a fake smile or fake my actual mood at school so others don't bother me. So with the system, people can see our real emotions without having to wonder if you're being honest about how you feel.
In conclusion, I feel that the Facial Action Coding System is super valuable in the classroom. This technology can benefit both the student and the teacher. It can making learning more personalized for the students and can help teachers figure out the emotions and true feelings of the students. | 3 |
The author suggest that studying venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents because.In the passage it talks about how no space craft has survived landings. on paragraph 2 it says "Each previous missions was unmanned, and for good reasons, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades."The author also explains how Venus's weather condition wouldnt cooporate with us humans needs. On paragraph 3 it states."On the planet's surface, temperatures avarage over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth".The author is trying to explain to the audience that Venus is a facinating place to do research on or exploar but very dangerous and Venus's conditions would kill a human because of its dangers. | 1 |
When you're thinking of the future, you are probably thinking of new technology.
Cars are going to be one of the biggest advances in technology withing the next couple of years.
Scientists have been working on these prototype cars that can drive themselves.
There are very many reasons that they have been coming up with this new idea.
First order of business is that with this new invention, there will be a lot less accidents on the roads.
The cars can save a lot of money that is washed away every year through drivers ed classes for teens.
It will be a safer environment for beginner drivers.
Instead of being fully in control, and being fully liable for an accident, the car will be the one in charge.
This car saves money, and saves lives.
Drinking and driving, this is a very familiar phrase to people nowadays.
This phrase does not bring joy, but brings out the worst in people.
There are over 100,000 accidents every year due to drunk driving.
So many lives are lost due to the lack of intelligence these people have.
With this car you will not have to deal with the stupidity of these people, you will not have to deal with worrying about a loved one coming home safely, these cars save families.
Texting and driving, another phrase among with brings sullen faces.
As a teenager, your life revolves around your phone.
Again, the stastics do not lie when they say that one of the top learders in death is due to automobile accients.
You know why there are so many automobile accidents?
Another characteristic of ruthless behavior.
With these self driving cars, you can text will the cars drives.
It is a win-win situation.
A lot of people take roadtrips.
Typically the people will take turns at the wheel, but of course, there is always that one that gets stuck with the night shift.
I do not believe anyone would care to be driving instead of getting a good nights rest.
You will save tons of money on going to hotels, because these cars drive for you at night while you get to sleep.
With these cars, they'll do the driving for you, you save money, and you get to your destination faster.
My fourth, and final statement is that technology is advancing more and more every day, one day we will have these self driving automobiles.
We might as well start know and get to know how to use them and learn their strenghts and weaknessess sooner rather than later.
Our kids will look back on how we used to actually drive ourself and be flaberghasted at the thought of that.
We will have to satisfaction of knowing that our children are safer on the roads with these cars.
In conclusion, these cars are the future of driving.
Whethere we like it or not, we will just have to deal with it.
You have to look at the positives of the situation, which overrule the negatives.
These cars are safer, and more reliable than the average car.
They are the car of tomorrow. | 1 |
Drivless cars has its cons and pros to it, but i would say it's a bad idea. Drivers have already enough on their plate when driving because not only do they have to keep themselves safe but also the people in the car and other cars that share the same road. Also the coast of this car would be outrageous. Most Americans would not be able to afford that luxery. The "driverless" car is also not something that represnts its name. When I think about "driverless" car I think about cars that have no need for divers even in the passaenger seat. These cars are not what they say they are, they only can drive when its easy and they alerat you when they could not be able to drive anymore. If companies are going to makes a driverless car they should go all out and not excite the consumers with hopes and lies.
In America it will always come down to one thing, money. How much time and research will it take to produce this car? "In the late 1950s, General motors created a concept car that could run on a special test track ... track was embedded with an electrical vale that sent radio signals to a reciever on the front end of the car" also "Engneers at Berkeley tried soemthing similar, but they used magnets with alternating polarity.. in binary code". While both of these test and ideas were a great invention the article stated it was just too expensive. Is this centurys technology different or more advance. America is 19 trillion dollars in debt this past year and the debt is only rising. If these cars would undergo production that would be a lot of money to produce and they would sell them for a lot more to the buyers, a luxery many americans can't afford. Then they would be left with no buyers and a ton of un-used cars, it would truely be a waste of money. Thats even saying if they can compose the car correctly.
There are also many other factors when it comes to testing and trying to produce these driverless cars. "In most states it is iligal to test computer-driven cars" so where do the comanies like GMC, BMW, and other companies that produce cars will test their cars. Testing the cars in safety and how it works is a must but what are the car companies going to do if they ever do get approved with their car. Laws in every state would have to shift and new laws would have to be created. Also new insurance policys would have to be created. All of this adds up to be a lot of money, something most amercians do not have.
In ever case of an acident, who's fualt woudl it be, driver or manufactuer? With the new laws that would have to be passes with this driverless car new libility coverages would have to be passes and bought by the consumers. Many question will arrise fromt he consumers. Their car insurance will defiantly go up just in cae of an accident. If an accident ever did occur in the hand of the driverless car, that never alerted the driver to take control, insurance would have to cover it of course but its not the drivers fualt for a malfunction in the car. The manufacture should be the one the pay the accident. Another con would be if the manufactur should on take the responsiblity and a even bigger accident happend like a death and the driver blammed it on the driverless car, who would go to jail then. These are many the factors one should think about before putting the driverless car in the market.
"Tesla has projected release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 precent of the time. Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by 2020". The driverless cars are already an undergo in production. No laws have been passed yet that could be able to drive this driverless car except California,Nevada,Florida, and the District of Columbia have allowed to only test cars. If these big car comapies decide to start working on and producucing thses cars they are going to have a while until they can start selling them due to no state allows american to drive. Thats more money they spent in pruduction that they will not see back right away. They will cuase Amercia to be more in debt. | 4 |
The author suggests that studying venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it present."vening star is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky, making it simple for even an anmateur stargazer to spot". this quote is telling us that the eveing star is really bright and its the most beautyfull star of all stars in the sky.
"often referred to as earths twin venus is the closest plant to Earth in terms of density and size and occasionally the closest in distance too". this quote is showing us the closest planets to the Earth. venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar sysrem, even though mercury is closer to our sun. The national aeronautice and space administration NASA has one particularry compelling idea for sending humans to study venus. NASA possible solution to the hodtile conditions on the surface of venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. imagine a blimp like vehile hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling venusain landscape. At 30 plus miles above the surface temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees fahrenheit but the air pressure would be close to that sea level on earth. Solar power would be plentiful and radition would not exceed earth levels not easy condition but survivable. in conclution this story is all about eart and the venus . | 0 |
In this essay, I will support my idea that the strange "Face of Mars" is just a natural formation. There is not to much evidence leaning either way, but I feel that it leans more twards being natural. We have not landed and investigated it yet. I have some evidence to support my idea. After reading this essay, I am sure that you will understand my point of view.
I belive that the face of mars is natural. First, It is just a large rock formation that could have just occured naturally. Second, There is no other sign of life on mars. Third, It only resembles a face, it is not perfect. It is still controversial because we cannot examin it face to face. We only have the images that the space shuttles took from 1976 through 2001. Just because it is a formation on a different planet, it doesn't mean it was created by aliens.
When God created the universe, did He say that He created little green men to live on the different planet? No. He said that the only intelligent being, with His breath in our lungs, that he created was use. Although, He did say He created the wonders of this universe. I would call the face a wonder, wouldn't you? God created one planet with the perfect design for life, and that planet is our home Earth. This is why I think that the Face of Mars is just a natural landform, and that there is no life on Mars. | 1 |
After reading the article, "Driverless Cars Are Coming.", I strongly found myself against the idea of cars becoming driverless. There is a various amount of issues that could arise from this irrational idea. I believe that if driverless cars were to exist as a regular item in our society many problems would occur.
Driverless Cars would cause an endless amount of dangers, failure within companies and manufacturers, as well as the amount of money that would be lost. Electronics that we use today fail all the time, and cause money loss and stress. I believe these cars would have to go through so many failures before actually being safe and useful. Our economy cannot afford to throw millions of dollars away building cars that will be used for hundreds of trial tests, and then thrown away. The failure percentage will be so high for these cars, and will cause so many problems for the manufacturers, people, and the economy alone. Another reason these cars would be a disaster is the danger it will create. In the article it talks about how people would get bored if they were doing none of the driving, which would cause them to fall asleep or to find a distraction like games, or phones. It also says that in tight spaces or traffic the car would need the human to takeover the driving. Concluding these two facts from the article, drivers will get distracted and when needed by the car to takeover they won't be capable of doing so. This is just one reason I found that these cars will put people in dangerous situations. Cars are to dangerous of an electronic to be putting people in, and testing the unknown. My last reason supporting the irrational idea of driverless cars, is the money that would be lost. Currently the united states is in debt by trillions of dollars, and even the idea of this adds onto the amount of money were are behind on. It would cost millions of dollars to build them, replace them, find the required research, and and endless amount of other things. Also, since they are going to be electronically driven, whos fault will it really be if they were to stop functioning? This question will arise in many court cases when manufactures get sued, and will again cost a fortune. This idea will take money out of everyones pockets, and the currently unstable economy does not need that. There are many other reasons to be argued why these cars would be a horrible idea.
In conclusion to my reasons, this is why I believe if driverless cars were to exist as a regular in our society many problems would occur. The endless amount of money, dangers, and failure accurately describe what this idea would do to our nation. Driverless cars will fail our economy. | 2 |
The challenge of exploring venus is is that the atmospheric pressure is over 90 time greater then what we have here then what we ever will have here on earth. The normal temperatures on venus is about 800. The most we every get here is about some where in the 100s if you go to venus you will cook like your diner would. And there is way to much mercury on the plant. The plant havs a rocky surface. It has valleys and mountanins. It is kinda like earth.
NASA has an idea thst they want to send people up to go and study the plant but not put then not the plant cause you can't land on it. They want them to fly above it and study it. And see what they can learn about it and see about it. But still being that far away from the plant it would be 170. The air pressurse would be sea level on earth. They would be hovering about 30 miles above it. It would not be easy for them them but it still be survivable for humans.
NASA is working on a study on Venus with a diffrent approaches. One example is the silicon carbide that have been test in chambers. The have looked back at old technology. One called mechanical computers they where frist made in the 1800s. But they frist played a role in the 1940s.
They are looking for stuff that will give them more power. Modern computer are more powerful, flexible and quick. They need it to suroivoiur the heat of Venus. because it is not use to that much heat. | 0 |
Driverless cars or drivers driving a car? Technology is good but too much can be fatal. Driverless cars will be inefficient, expensive, and make people lazy.
Driverless cars will become inefficient because after a few years they'll need repare and could get viruses in them. Driverless cars so far require of human skill so people still need to be aware. Therefore, probably causing many accidents on the road because of unefficiency from the car. Drivers would get bored to await their to turn to drive. So far there are no laws that approve driverless cars, because it requires a human to drive a car.
Not only will they be inefficient but will cost many companies a lot of money to develop. In the late 1950s, General Motors created a concept car that could run on special track embedded with electrical cable; however, it required massive upgrades to exisiting road, something that was too expensive to be practical. Not only will it be expensive for companies but also for the state making roads for the driveless cars. A radar that would help with the transportation of driverless cars can cost up to two hundred million dollars.
If driverless cars ever came to be that would make people very lazy. People would be picked up whenever they need to go somewhere without causing them a little of activity but to walk to a car. Yes, it could be a benefit when you have an emergency and can't drive yourself around. Yet there are numbers and places you could call in case of an emergency. Humans will eventually rely on technology so much that soon they'll invent chairs that require no getting up from them to go to the kitchen. People need to be active and with driverless cars there'll be a lazy society.
Technology is becoming to powerful and needs to be limited. With driverless cars there will be a lot of economical expenses, many inefficencies, and laziness among the country. | 3 |
The author supports the idea of that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents by the author explains the pros of going in Venus and how NASA made it easier for everyone. The author talks more about how going to Venus can also be a good thing for the scientists.
Going to the venus can be a bad thing, but the scientists will have more opportunities to learn about the similerities and the differences between the Earth and Venus. The author provides information about the distence from earth to venus. The author provided, "Often referred to as Earths twin, Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too" (paragraph 2). This evidence explains that it can also be very easy for the scientists to travel there than to travel to the other planets because it is very close to Earth and that's why people call it the "twin" of earth. The author goes furthermore explaining about the pros of going to Venus. The author talks about how scientists also like to go to the Venus because Venus is more earthy. It is stated, "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system" (paragraph 4). This evidence also proves that the scientists wants to go to Venus and explore it. Venus was covered largely with oceans long ago, and it also supported various forms of life just like earth does. It is the nearest option for scientists for a planetary visits. NASA has also came up with a possible solution for to go to Venus. It is written, "NASAs possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray" (paragraph 5). Now here is the solution for scientists to go to Venus. It will be a lot easier now and more fun for scientists to visit another planet just like Earth. Also to learn more about it.
Venus could be hard planet to visit, but NASA has provided a solution which could help scientists to visit the similar planet. Not only it is fun to visit, but it can help people learn about why Venus is similar to Earth and why can anyone not go there. Therefore, NASA will be able to send people there and learn all about Venus' similarities and the differences. | 3 |
Dear Mr. Senator,
I would like to argue with your decision of getting rid of the electoral college. I would like to argue with you because the Electoral college is a piece of history, we could some problems if we keep the electoral college, but there are a bit of problems with this voting system. So Senator this is my letter that i want you to read so you can rethink the decision of getting rid of the Electoral college.
The Electoral college is a voting system that depends on the popular votes to see who gets the electoral votes in the president race. The founding fathers established the electoral college in the constitution, which means this voting system has been with this country since the beginning of the United States. To get rid of the Electoral college is like getting rid of a piece of this country. The founding fathers made the electoral college so the president and vice president could get chosen. There are five hundred and thirty eight electoral votes possible to get. To win presidency you must have two hundred and seventy electoral votes. These votes are one of the most important things. So I want you Senator to imagine getting rid of a piece of the constitution, just imagine ripping a little piece off. Guess what you can't because the constitution is to important to this country to take anything off of it. This is one reason Senator that the electoral college should not be disbanded.
The Electoral College has the ability to get rid off problems such as avoiding run off elections, which means that no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast. The Electoral College also has swing states, which means the people in the state pay close attention to what the candidates say and vote for who they feel should win so that the winner take all method isn't in effect. A good example of a run-off election is the elections of Richard Nixon and Bill clinton. Both of these presidents had forty three percent of the populare votes, but dominated in the electoral votes. A good example of a winner take all method is the election of 2012 where the candidates focused on the voters in the toss up states or the states that listen and vote for who they think is better. Another example of a run-off election is if a candidate does not win a majority of the votes vast than the presidential election would be greatly complicated. The complication is then reduced by the Electoral College, which chooses a winner. The Electoral College can save a lot of things for just a voting system.
Although the Electoral College helps a lot there is a couple problems with it. When you vote you vote for who you want to vote for, but when that vote gets put in the Electoral College doesn't have to put there vote to who you voted for. The Electoral College is also unfair to voters because of the winner take all system. During the 2000 campaign some states didn't even get to see their candidates. Some states didn't even get to see a ad on tv for their candidates. The Electoral College is also known as the disaster factor because of the crisis in the election of 2000. The electors are chosen by the legislatures and the electors could always defy the will of the people. The Electoral College can be fixed, so don't take it way that way it can be fixed and arranged.
The Electoral College is good because it keeps us away from problems, even though it has some, and is a part of our history. This whole letter is to explain why you the senator should not take the electoral college away. I have to say it has problems, but those problems can be fixed by some simple solution.
From, PROPER_NAME Student of
SCHOOL_NAME | 3 |
The "face" on Mars has become something of an controversy since an image of it was released back in 1976. The fact that people to this day believe it is still something created by ancient alien life bewilders NASA. Conspiracy theorists have concoted thousands of theories relating to NASA withholding information about extra-terrestrial life from the general public. None of which, have ever been proven, and/or ever had any solid evidence to back them up. Therefore, the face on mars is not the result of extra terrestrial life, but more of the result of hundreds of years of weathering and shaping.
As stated above, many conspiracy theorists believe that the "face" on Mars is the result of an utterly alien civilization. That is just not true. They accuse NASA of trying to hide it, yet, there is no evidence to support this. The discovery of an ancient alien civilization would greatly benefit NASA. The amount of funding and support they would recieve would be massive. Those within NASA's ranks that believe there is extra-terrestrial life out in space would have reached their lifelong goal of discovering it. There would be a huge incline of investors and programs willing to support and back-up NASA in all their endevours. Therefore, if NASA concluded that this "face," was the creation of an ancient alien civilization, they would have no reason to put their finding out there into the public, without stating what they believed it truly is.
Another piece of evidence for the "face" just being a naturally formed feature, such as a butte or a mesa, is probably the most obvious fact. If NASA didn't want people to know about it, they would not have had it published for the general public's viewing. If NASA didn't want people to know that they had found evidence of an alien civilization, would they publish it and try to get people to believe that it was a natural formation? Of course not! It would have been a lot simpler to withhold the image and keep it secret rather than publish it. People make mistakes, but such a large government company such as NASA would have thought a little bit more before they published a picture they didn't want out there.
Finally, the last piece of evidence is another obvious one. Back in the 1970's, we did not have the sort of technology we have nowadays. The cameras were not as sharp and nowhere near the amount of pixels today's photography equipment has. The "face" was photographed twice more after the original image surfaced in 1976. The first picture was very blurry and was the main reason that people belived it was that of an alien civilization. In the original photograph, each pixel spanned about 43 meters, versus 2001's 1.56 meters. The second picture taken was a lot less blurry, and was taken in 1998. It showed a lot more and a allowed for almost no question that it wasn't what NASA said it was. People were not convinced, due to the fact that it was taken during a cloudy season on Mars, and was said to have obscured markings that might have led to it being identified as alien. The last picture was taken in 2001. There is no question with this picture. It clearly shows a natural landform with no strange markings and/or features.
The face on mars is not the result of extra terrestrial life, but more of the result of hundreds of years of weathering and shaping. After years of doubt, it is quite obvious that Mars' "face" is simply a natural formation. It is time for conspiracy theorists to put to rest their old, worn out ideas in favor of noble pursuits that can be backed up by solid evidence and scientific fact. It turns out, Mars's "face," is nothing more than it's butte. | 5 |
Everyone seems to be so excited by the thought of the driverless car being in our grasp. Sure, it is an amazing development in technology, but I do not support it. The article demonstrates most of the reasons I am againt driverless cars.
The first thing that comes to my mind after reading the article, was even questioned in the eighth paragraph of the article. "Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver?" That is a good question, and it helps raise other questions. As in, if the car needs a driver, is it really driverless? As well was as what is the point of having a car that drives itself if the driver still has to be present and alert to use it? Under those circumstances, it seems that the driver may as well just drive the car to their destination manually, because a driverless car is not truly "driverless" if a person has to take the wheel at any time to drive.
Another point that seems important, is the technology. How reliable is it? From the sound of the article, the technology being used in driverless cars is still in testing and experimenting phases. We have not had the technology very long, how do we know it will not fail once we actually implement it in our lives or release it to the public? Another point for this and my first argument, in order for a car to be truly driverless, wouldn't we need the car to have an artificial intelligence advanced enough to calculate possible outcomes of a situation and make decisions on its own? It just does not seem like the technology is quite ready.
The big factor that seems to matter to just about everyone, is the cost. The article does not seem to include cost as a factor. I don't think something that costs a ton of money to use or create would be particularly useful, especially in an early state such as mentioned in the last paragraph. The thing is, it has to be marketable and accessible to the public to really be considered a success. Something that is does not fit a wide target market will not make a profit, its as simple as that.
In conclusion, it does not seem that "driverless cars" are quite ready to become mainstream. There is not really a need for a driverless car that requires a driver to be there anyway. The technology is not quite advanced enough. The target market might not be there, it might not make a profit. Maybe driverless cars are just a fad that will come and go, but time will tell. | 3 |
Imagin waking up to a peaceful sound, which means that there is barely cars outside. No traffic, no noise. Would in you like that. Many people probably have desired this. People would wake up in a more relaxed, joyful mood. since there is bearly cars outside. You could get to work or somewhere else faster, without traffic being the isue. You could also walk or cruse the road without any accedents. Yes, I think that they should limit the car usage.
To begin with, cars have a negavite effect. in source 1 it states that "In previous bills, 80 percent of appropiations have by law gone to highways and only 20 percent to other transport." which this means is that more money is going to repair highways. Instead of this money going to other couses like to student education. I n source 2 it says "After days of near- record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." Cars are cousing air pollution which is bad for the envirenment. Pollution is bad for the air. The air becomes toxic, that one day we will no be able to breath in it. Also in source 2 "cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emissions." this is one of the ways that car pollution is effecting the earth and its atmosphere. The plants will start to die because the air toxic. this does not just effect the plants or air it also effects us and animals ina way. we are used to breathing clean air that when it's toxic, our lungs will not function right, and we could also die.
Moreover, in many places they are using programs. In source 3 "in a program that's set to spread to other countries, millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during a car-free day yesterday,leaving the street of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams." Avoiding cars is a good thing because instead of driving everywhere, they can finally enjoy thier surroundings. They would just go to the place they need to go and back home. That was their life. With that one day they can realize that they are missing out on a beautiful day. in source 4 "New York's new bike-sharing program anhd its skyrocketing bridge and tunnel tolls reflect those new prioities, as do a proliferation of car-sharing programs across the nation." Thes programs can help them by doing new things. Instead of their regular rutin. Trying new things can open your point of mind.
In the other hand, No, I think that they should not limit the car usage. | 2 |
In the article, "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author suggests that "studying Venus is a worthy pursute despite the dangers it presents." I agree with this, I think that venus is worthy enough to study even though its has many dangers to the planet.
One claim that "studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents" is that people send many spaceship to land on Venus, but no spacecraft has survived the landing for more than a few hours. A piece of evidence from the text that supports my claim says, "Humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world. Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe ths issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades." This supports my claim because Venus is a challenging planet for humans to sutdy because we can't get a spaceship to land without it crashing after a few hours. But it is still worthy enough to study despite the dangers it presents.
A second claim that sudying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers is presents" is that although Venus is much like our planet, we may not be able to survive in Venus. A piece of evidence from the text that supports my claim says, "On the planet's surface, tempatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenhiet, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own panet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encunter on earth." This supports my claim because Venus has the hottest surfface tempature of any plant in out solar system. But it is still worthy enough to study despite the dangers it presents.
A third claim that "studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents" is that people trying to study cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anythng else, from a distnace unless they get up close. A piece of evidence that supports my claim says, "Hovering safely far above the planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmospere." Another piece of evidence from the text says, "Therefore, scientists seeking to conduct a thorough mission to understand Venus woud need to get up close and personal despite the risks." This evidence from the text supports my claim because, people trying to research Venus have a hrad time doing it unless they could get up close to the the planets surface. Many researchers are working on ways to make the machines last longer despite the risk it may have. But it is still worthy enough to study despite the dangers it presents.
Overall, I support the authors suggestion that "studying Venus is a worthy pursute desite the dangers it presents." Venus is a worthy pursute desite the dangers it presents because researchers hve a lot to learn from this planet and what it has to hold. Just like it says in the text, "Our travles on earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." I believe that when there are things that may be difficult, there will always be a way of getting throuh to it, There will always be someone willing to get through to it, despitte the dangers it presents. | 3 |
Dear fellow citezens of America it has come to my attention that pollution in the United States is getting worse so I have a solution use cars less. It is simple, this will help cut pollution in the U.S as the second biggest polluting factor is gone and can actually help you with a better social life as well as helping rebuild the community.
As mentioned earlier,cars are the second leading cause of pollution in the U.S and cutting that will help stop some pollution by stopping one of the biigest causes. Stopping the use of cars will cut the carbon in the air and this in turn can lead to a healthier lifestyle as well. There are many neighborhoods that are car-less and we have recieved good results from said neighborhoods as well as car free day is becoming a hit in Columbia as well as other parts in central America. This will also make smog a less likely occurence as no car fumes are getting trapped therefore, cleaner, unpolluted air. This will help prevent the same pollution levels like in Paris pop up here.
A life without cars can also posotivly affect the social lives of many people. As people are more likely to just walk and talk with freinds or just walk or bike to the park. people in car-less communitys like Vauban have even said they feel less stress now that they don't have cars. Young Americans have even started loseing intrests in cars and would rather take public transport or carpool with freinds then just take their own car. And as a result are tighter with their freinds and family then before.
People who use cars for transport are less likely to use the sidewalk or ride their bike and as a result sidewalks and bike paths are uneven and ragged. Therefore without cars, things like disrepaired sidewalks or roads would come to our attention. For example Car Free Day in Columbia led to the repair of sidewalks and 118 miles of bike roads and more sport centers parks and shopping districts have started to pop up. Getting rid of cars can help us rebuild the community with more parks and public centers and hangouts. This will also lead to better security as less people will get hit by cars, less car accidents and overall better security.
In conclusion my fellow citezens, please consider makeing this community car-less. for their are many advantages for doing so in this community from the enviromental, to the social and to the health benefits. | 3 |
"It's a good oppurtunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," stated in
Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota.
Using means of transportation other than cars, such as walking or biking can release stress and help lower air pollution.
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars states ""When i had a car I was always tense. Im much happier this way," said Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two, as she walked the verdant streets where the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drown out the occasional distant motor." This walk allowed her to release stress- versus driving a car could make her more stressed and causes air pollution.
"After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city;" from
Paris bans driving due to smog.
If less cars are being used, then there will be less air pollution and cleaner air.
By using other ways of transportation or limiting our use of cars, we can release stress and lower air pollution. Walking, biking, or carpooling are good ways to do so. | 1 |
Going 'car-free' seems like an excellent idea! Perhaps even less days of usage. It would be safer and bring cleanliness to the air to whole new level. No more angry citizens beacuse of global warming and our atmosphere will stop getting thinner. As well as less deaths due to a motor vehicle.
Our streets will be so safe that parents will not have to worry as much about their kids getting abducted or hit by a car. For example if we were to only use public transportation such as buses there is no way that a child or adult can be taken and successfully brought to the destination of the persons choice. Simply because there will be no where to hide or secretly place the child or adult.
The amount of deaths would drop dramatically if cars were used less on a daily basis. There would be less D.U.I'S, distracted driving, even collisions because some young individual decided to break the law. So many positive things to think of and yet the court would still have to deal with these occaisional issues.
At least they would be occaisional.
The air would be so clean that no one would have to worry so much about pollution. The atmosphere would not contiue to get thinner through time. Thus buying us more time to eventually find a permanent fix in the future. Rioting would most likely come to an end because of these acts. We can also look foward to what some prefer to call 'crazy folks' to have signs around thier necks and around town claiming the world will end soon. All of this would come to an end because we stopped using cars as much. Last but not least, people of the world and Earth itself would lead a happy and healthier life because we wont inhale so much toxic air and polluted Earth's air. | 2 |
The aurthor of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" said in paragraph 1, they point out that Venus is sometimes calle the "Evening Star" because it is one of the brightest points of light in the nigth sky. Some people mistaken the names beacuse Venus is actually a planet. Venus is the second planet from the sun.
In paragraph 2 it says that Venus is considered Earth's "twin". They say that because they are simlar in shape and size. The one of the differences they have is speed. In paragraph 2 it also states that, "because Venus is sometimes right around the corner - in space terms - humans have sent numerous spacecrafts to land on this cloud-draped world."
In paragrap 3 it says that, Venus has a thick atmoshpere of almost 97 persent and the layers are considered blankets. The clouds have highly corrosive sulfuric acid in the atmosphere. The temperatures range up to 800 degrees fahrenhiet. The atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we are used to. The pressure from that would crush a submarine accustomed to diving in the deepest partof the ocean.
In paragraph 4 that they don't quite understand why they are studing "our sister planet". The aurthor states that the planet Venus is "inhospitable" and he/she want to know why Scientists are even discussing going back. The aurthor also state in paragraph 4 that they don't understand why Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because the author think the reason is that because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. They also state in pararaph 4 that they think that Venus was once "covered largely with oceans". That it couldv'e supported various forms of life like Earth does. They state that Venus has some features that life couldv'e been on it.
In paragraph 5, it says that NASA is thinking about sending human to Venus. They have invented a spacecraft that can travel on the fray on the outside of Venus. They think that it will work so it avoyeds all the storms and other conditions that is happening on the planet. They say that the temperature wil still be toasty around 170 degrees fahrenheit.
Everything in these 5 paragraphs that I have listed are reasons why pursuiting to Venus is very dangers. | 0 |
Do you think the face on Mars was created by aliens?
How can you believe that the face on Mars was aliens? it is obviously just another landform of Mars'. Here, i'll go through some evidence that it is just a landform.
First of all, landforms like that are common in Cydonia. Also, keep in mind that appearances can be decieving. You can even see a similar landform right by the "face". And plus, there is no scientific evidence of life on another planet, let alone Mars. Simply stating that a haze could've hid the "alien" markings is hardly a compelling argument.
Second off, The photo they took in 2001 proves even further that it just a normal martian messa. and accourding to the article that have read, "you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size." if you want to check this article out, you can find that information in paragraph 11. so if there were any alien objects, you could both see what they were and even know what they were.
I think i have proven my point. so don't even try to argue that, you will not succeed. i know that you might say, well NASA is just lying. My response is that if you had the money to afford a satellite and you sent there, with the current high grade cameras, you would find that you were wrong all along. so yes I win this argument, and that the "face" on Mars is just a messa. | 2 |
Can we smile?
In the passage in descibes how much technology has progreseed over the years. Went from Old Windowss, then Microsfot, and now we have technology that can read exprssions. The way this works. You just can not use just some simple gaming PC. Thers this computer based opperation that can describe your mood or how you feel, but is this safe to use around children and is the world ready for this kind of technology?.
There are pros and cons on using this for people in the outside world. Some pros are, it is very interesting to see how it works. Kids cold see how the muscles in your jaw and sides of your mouths flex and pull just make that simple smile that you never wanna make when grandma wants to take a picture with you. Also it could show a kid a feeling they do not notice or feel about themselves. Say your thinking of doing anything harmful to someone or to yourself the system can probably see that through the system.
Some cons are, what if a child or teen is going through a lot, and they do not want there feeling shown. What if it shows depression in the smile. Also the story says there are many doctors that have worked on this facial recognition system, and it could really be complex. The doctors are two smart doctors all over, Professer Thomas Huang from Beckman Insitute for Advanced Science at the University of Illinois. Also, Professer Nicu Sebe of University of Amsterdam.
Some kids might think it is like a Transformer. The question I have is how can they do the prcess ona painting from Italy. Well just the right way it is positioned. Do I think it should be in a classroom? No, because it could bedangerous with all the technology. Do I think kids should at least know how it wrks and what th computer looks like? Yes, because this our new generation, technolgy will never stop being created. You can not stop technology.
In conclusion, the computer based media can be used in and positive way and negative way also. So tech can be useful some does not even have to chance to make it in the outside world. But, using it to describe how you feel and why you feel, how bad can that be? | 2 |
I believe that the computer reading facial experssions in the classoom for students is valuable because if they see the student get bored or not intrested they can tell what to show in there intrest so they can teach the students. It will be more helpful for the teachers to keep the students on task while on the computer. The teachers wont have to worry about the students not learning anything cause they are not intrested. Being able to read face expressions is a good idea and it helps alot on knowing weather the students are intrested or not. Some students won't tell you they dont like the way you are teaching them and they just get off task and not pay attention whats so ever.
There are alot of times that students get bored on how the teacher is teaching the extructions and just get distracted and not learn a thing. Having a computer help them with that will be awesome for both teachers and students. They will both get something out it by one learning and paying more attention and the teacher doings its job on helping them understand. Most students will enjoy the fact they can learn off something that intrests them the most. There won't be alot of class distraction.
We will have more students passings classes. Have more students on task. Teachers wont have to be complaining so much on how students are paying attention. Also on how they are distracting the class cause they are beyound bored. That is my opinion on why getting facial experssion is valuable! | 2 |
I argue in favor of changing to election by popular vote for the president of the united states. The electon could have a bias opinion and go against what the people want. "It's offical: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational." Also, in 1976 if a mere 5,559 voter in Ohio and 3,687 voters in Hawaii would have voted differently it would have been a tie. That would have been a catastrophe.
In 960 segregationist almost succeded in replacing the democratic electors with electors who would haved picked John F. Kennedy's opponent. Also, during the 1960's in Hawaii Vice President Richard Nixon had been presiding over the senate, validating only his opponent's electors. Although, he had done so without creating a precedent.
The Electoral College is a non-democratic method of selecting a President. The five reasons we have retained the Electoral College despite its lack of democratic pedigree. All are practical reasons not conservative and non-liberal reasons. With other things being equal other things are not. Also, larger states will get more political attention from presidental candidates in a campaign verse a smaller state. | 1 |
My position on driverless cars is that I am against it. Autonomous cars still need the driver to be focused on the road. The driver must always be ready to take control of the car in any situation. I feel like autonomous cars give a false sense of safety when it comes to driving one of these autonomous cars. The cars arent fully autonomous they still require the driver to have his hands on the wheel in case he has to overtake the controls.
One reason I am against it is because no road that we drive on is fully predictable, so the cars wont know what to do when some situations arise. Most people who buy autonomous cars think they dont have to focus on the road and just leave it all to the car. Thats false, thats what makes these cars dangerous in a sense. " The can steer, accelerate, and break themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skill," this is the reason I am against it. There may be a time that the driver needs to take over and steer the car out of danger, but since the driver had a false sense of security, he/she wont have time to react. They wouldnt have time to react because they might've been doing something else in the driver seat thinking that the car will steer itself. This is why drivers should always be in full control of the car at all times, because no road is predictable and it requires fast human skills if any situation arises.
There might be safety precautions that can try to prevent you from falling asleep at the wheel. This wont help at all in my opinion. Since the driver isnt doing anything, they will feel tired and bored and close their eyes and sleep. If they're really tired they wont hear the warning signs about work zones or any other warning in that matter. Everyone is different, some people are light sleepers and others are heavy. "GM has developed driver's seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger of backing into an object." This will fail in some occasions. Say you're a heavy sleeper, and you dont feel the vibrations, and you crash into an object. Will that be your fault or the manufactorers fault for giving you a false sense of safety? Does the vibration have a setting to make it vibrate violently to wake the driver up? Does the vibration start happening at different distances depending on the speed of the car? Also how does one know the reaction time of a driver? These are the test they need to do to know how to make these cars safer. The reaction time of a person woken up from sleep is really slow compared to someone who is fully awake. Also how does the car recognize that a danger is going to happen.
In conclusion this is why I think autonomous cars is not good for the people. Its not safe for the driver who is moving at high speeds down the highway with a false sense of safety. Its not safe for pedestrians who cross streets not knowing if a human is controlling the car or not. Streets will never be predictable and the computers on the car will go off of predictability. Yes there will always be a traffic hazard everywhere you go, and the car might not know what to do and its up to you to get yourself and the car out of harms way. This wont happen if you're asleep at the wheel thinking the car will do it itself and you wont have to do a thing. I feel like if a person is wanting to buy a autonomous car, they will have to take courses on how to correctly use the controls and also what to do when theres an emergency ahead. They will have to know the fundimental things like dont fall asleep on the wheel, always be focused and looking for potentional hazards ahead. Always put your hands on the wheel whenever the car tells you to. Also the main thing they should focus on is to never trust the car to get you from one place to another without your assistance along the way. Thats why in think autonomous cars a negative thing. | 4 |
Luke reason he joined the program was because he had two part time joby and his friends where going and they asked him if he wanted to go. And Luke could not say no so he went. And he would be missing an opportunity in his life time. Lukes 2 part time jobs where working at a store and a bank.
It was 1945 world war 2 Luke and Don signed up to feed the animals. They has to fees 335 horses. They also had to feed cows, and mules that they had to feed.
It was August 1945 , The boys just recived their order reports to new Orlans.
Luke is now 18 year sold Luke said that they had a sight seeing of Europe and China. It took 2 weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean. And It took a month to get to China.
Luke surved as a night watch man. He had to feed the animals every hour. So that way they did not have to starve. And cry all night for food and water to eat and drink.
A small strip of metal along the edge stopped his slide, keeping him from flying overboard into the dark Atlantic.
He was happy to be alive. But he couldnt work for a couple of days because of cracked ribs.
Luke also found time to have fun and he got to play volleyball, table tennis,boxing and fencing but this happend after they unloaded the animals then they got to have fun and enjoy their time.
Luke crossed the Atlantic Ocean 16 times and he crossed the PAcific Ocean twice to help people affected by World War 2. | 0 |
Venus is just like earth but the venus really hold some lives in earth like some animal and some other thing. Venus is a good planet but on big problem we dont know how the life is over there and we really know if it could hold all lifes. Thats why scientist are gonna send a drone or a spaceship to go check it out the venus life. People think that sound crazy but in reality is not is a good thing cause what if some thing happens to our earth and we have no where to go. Scientist said that the planet venus had live so many years ago and the scientist also think there were living things in that planet. Thats why scientist want to go and see if venus is worth living over there and if it could have a big empact to our lives and also if it could hold lives there with no problem. I think we should give it a shot and see if the planet venus could hold any lives and if its not dangerous to go and make other home like earth and make it better. I think everyone will be happy to see if venus will be our next home planet. It will be wired if we find any lives over there like not human related different spices. | 1 |
Driverless cars would be very usefull, epecially in this generation because of all the teenagers now a days using their phones while driving, and causing accidents. A driverless car would help that problem. A driverless car would help all people ranging from all ages. The diverless car also pays closer attention to the road thatn any individual would. A driverless car in general would help people of older age as well.
The driverless car would prevent teenageers and from getting into accidents. Teenages now a days don't know how to stay off their phones so that causes accidents, with a driverless car the car does the driving for you all you have to do is sit there and pay attention every once in a while. The driverless car would protect the driver, especialy when they are not paying any attention to the road.
With all that being said, the driverless car would pay closer attention to the road. Say there might be a deer in the middle of road and the driver isn't paying any attention. The car would sense it and would stop automatically. Say somehting just pops up out of nowhere, the car would know and would sense it. What the car does is it senses it and it reduces power from the engine as it is applying the breaks. That is how that works, and as technology advances this will advance as well and only get better.
My final reasoning is very simple. The driverless car would help out elders who may not have the eye sight that they may have had when they where thirty years old. Also people who loose their hearing, they wouldn't be able to hear certian things that might be going on around them. So the driverless car would help elders get around town a lot better than having to pay a lot of money for a driver or car sevice. Some elders do no pay attention to what is going on, so as long as they would have a driverless car I think they would be good to go.
With all that being said I am all for having driverless cars. They would help prevent accidents epecially with teenagers who are constantly on their phones. The car pays closer attention to the rather than and iduvidual. And finally the car would help elders get around rather than them having to pay alot of money to have a driver or alwasy use a car service. Just in general I feel a driverless car would be great for everyone now a days. | 3 |
Will driverless cars benifit us in the future?
I do believe that if google works on these cars to keep improving them in the near future over the next ten to twenty years they will benifit us as the years go on. In fact did you know that google has had cars drive independently under certain conditions since 2009. That's incredable, and to say that they use twice as less gas than the cars use today is even more incredable, because of the fact that the people in the United States or even in other places in the world could save on gas. They are still dangours, but they will improve over the years. We have a big future coming with selfdriving cars over the next ten to twenty years.
One of the most intresting things i read out of this whole passage was that on top of the cars that are selfdriving there is a spinning senor that creates 3-D models of the cars surroundings. That is called the Dubbed LIDAR, and it is used for detecting cars and objects that is around it to prevent crashes. That can either go one of two ways. I believe that if something happens to the computer that is running the car to keep it or make it drive indepently if something happens the car will end up wrecking or the car turns itself off. It could also have nothing happen to it and google makes a car flawless that can drive on its own. Considering we can save on gas and if these cars can drive by itself and without any glitches in the system and nothing happens who doesn't want that.
If these cars are even assisting with brakes or turns instead of taking full control that would be cool to. It could be rather dangours if these cars had full control of the vehicle. I'd prefer if a car only assisted me on turns and brakes and if it did have full control i'd want there to be a setting in the car that determines that. In these cars the computer can detect the laws and speed limit which is pretty cool if i do say so myself. Since the computer detects the laws if a law changes i'd want someone to be able to change that in the computer to keep those people in the cars safe at akk times.
Laws are always a concern for people with plan cars that aren't self driving and nobody wants to break the law unless the are 100% crazy. Imagine if someone was in a driverless car and the car just took off at speeds over 100MPH. Would the person in the car be charged for that or the company that produces the car if it was the cars or computers fault? Realistically the cops would have to investagate it, but i'd charge the company that makes the car. Before they send a car on the market do lots of test so that never happens, but if it does make sure the cops investagate what actually happened. These cars are very sketch and if something bad happens the company needs to be aware ,because anything can happen eith driverless cars.
These cars will benifit us later in the next ten to twenty years. If the manufacters sent these cars out and put them on the market who knows what will happen. The companies that are currently working on these cars need to keep working on them, and need to not send them out for sale yet. We can save on gas, but its not worth risking peoples lifes over driverless cars that are not 100% complete yet. We need to wait until we in the United States have the money or technology to finish this project. Google works hard on these veryday and week to keep improving them, and they need to relize these issues and get them solved. I also read they had people testing these cars and there was only like 1000 of them out there for testing which is how it should be so we aren't risking thousands of peoples lifes all over the world. Hopefully we can see these cars in the next ten to twenty years in the United sates and even if posiable to see them in other countries. | 4 |
In Germany-Residents of this rising community are suburban pioneers, Leaving in where few soccer mums are at or commuting executives have ever gone before:
they must have giving up their cars.
"It's about forbidden border lines and in this experimental". The new district on the outskirts of Freiburg, of the French and Swiss border not to say "Vauban's streets are completely Car free". There is to be said to be a dowtown Freiburg runs, and a few streets on on edge on the community.
However the thing is there is Car ownership it all comes down to only those who have $40,000, along with a house. As the result states, only Vauban's families don't own cars the estimate is 70 percent. And the other half has 57 percent cars to move here. "When I had a car life was always tense. I'm say that "Heidrun Walter you Sir, haven't enjoyed life as much But atleast you are still in shape that't is for sure !"
Vauban, completed in 2006 , is the best example growing trending topic in the roots of Europe, the United states have much different ways to travel then else-where to separates suburban life from the the life style the U.S(United states) and made it a chance to start a new begining a new era, with car's to make a new component that is givin to them is called "smart planning."
The Automobiles are linchpin of the suburbs, where the middle-class families are from Chicago to Shanghai to have the nerve to make their homes. And as we know that, that's what the experts say, for now they shall say that. And there is a huge impimentation to current efforts to decrease life's drastically reducing greenhouse from the tailpipes as it was said to be done . . . .
Passenger cars are resonsible for 12 percentof the gass emissons in Europe . . . and it's said to be that, "50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States."
While it has been two decades to make the cities less denser then before, and better for walking , plans are all falling into the concept of the suburbs . . . Vauban, home to the 5,500 residents within a rectangular squre mile, it might be the most advanced experimentation in low-car suburban life has had. But its still a change as we precepts are adopted around the world to make the suburan race to be more compacted to get more accessability to public transportation, with less space for parking.
In other words in this new approach, stores are placed a walk away, on the main street that is, If rather than in malls along some distant highway. The artical states that "All of the development in this same old War in World War II to center their main attentions , That the car will have to change", said by David Goldberg, an official Transportation Licencing for the America, a fast-growing coalition of hundereds of groups in the United States . . . who are premoting new communities that are less dependent on cars, Mr. Goldberg says adding on: "How much will you be willing to drive as it is important as you whether you have a hybird."
Levittown and Scarsdale, New York suburbs with spread-out homes with private dreams in towns in the late 1950s and still exerting a strong appeal. But some new suburbs may well look more Vauban-like, not only did the developing of the countries but also in the developing of the world, where emissionsives from such in increase number rating of private cars are owned by the burgeoning middle class are choking cities and such.
In other words, In the United States the Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.E.V.P.A) are premoting "car reductions" communities, and the legistlative branch are starting to take an act, if cautiously is what it takes. Many experts expect public transportation is serving the suburbs to play a much more larger role in a new six-year federal transportational bill to be approved this year, Mr. Goldberg claims and says.
In previous past bills, 80 percent of appropriations have by gone to law gone to the highways and only 20 percent to other of these highly organized transportaions. Hopefully this contant won't be Copy righted as it says by the Autor Elisabeth Rosental all of this is for educational practices. Hopfully you guys will enjoy this essay. | 0 |
I think that the use of technology to read the emotions of students in a classroom is valuable , because they can read how you feel as in if you are happy Susan can read how happy a person is , she can read if something is discusting to you as an example bugs , they are gross if Lola had seen a bug she would get sick to her stomach. Computers can also read if you are scared or angry If there was a painting hanging on a random wall she could read who made the panting, what brand of colors used, which type of paint brushes invested , she could even find out where the painting was created and or if robert was still alive . It's actuallyamazing how computers can even tell what state or city the painter was from and also about his colleauges he worked with. These computers can construct a 3-D computer model of the face too. | 1 |
The Face, an interesting topic to many people. Although some people question its formity. Is it a natural landform? Or was it created by Aliens? People have their opinions on what it is but after doing more research from NASA, this article explains what the Face really is. It gives you background information to help understand what the Face is, a natural landform.
"The Face has been seen by multiple NASA scientists. Many argue that it was created by Aliens while others argue the Face is just a natural landform. In paragraph three of the article it states "The caption noted a 'huge rock formation... which resembles as a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." The paragraph said it was a rock formation, which is part of natural landform. The Face was just a rock forned like a human head and that only the shadows are giving out an illusion of a human face. After a few years scientists went back to Cydonia to explore more about this odd structure. On April 5, 1998, Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time. Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiters camera team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the orginial Viking's photos. On a JPL web site it was revealed that there was no alien momentum after all, it was just a natural landform. People were still not satisfied with this research. So on April 8, 2001, Mars Global Surveyor went back to Cydonia to snap more pictures of the Face. Once he got the picture, the text states in paragraph twelve "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a Butee or messa-landforms common in the American west."
This article gives more research and information about the Face being a natural landform then it does about it being created by Aliens. In some paragraphs the text gives you background information to understand that the Face is a natural landform. People may still have their thoughts about it being created by Aliens but as NASA explores more about this structure they have all the proof they need to prove that the Face is yet another natural landform. | 2 |
In 1976, a remarkable natural landform was discovered on Mars, a land form known now as, The Face. Scientist have debated on whether The Face is a natural landform or created by an ancient civilization on Mars. I believe this is really just a natural landform, and the reason I believe this is because of recent evidence. Reasons why I support this are, in 1976 picture quality wasn't as advanced as it is today and, this rock formation is similar to ones that occur on Earth.
The Face, a huge rock formation, at nearly two miles long. This face like formation is also known as Cydonia. Cydonia in the mid 70's was thought to be a strange landform built by aliens. Although, really it's like any other naturally occuring landform on Earth. According to the artical "Unmasking the Face on Mars," "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West." In the new updated picture of The Face, it is clearly seen as a land formation, not done by aliens.
Then in 1976 picture of Cydonia was not as advanced as it is today. In the 2001 pictures, "Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 photo." This quote from paragraph 10 explains that, the picture power was very noticable different in the photograph from 1976 than 2001. This means that the pictures from 1976 are not reliable because of the poor pixel quality. Proving that The Face is just a natural landform.
On April 5th, 1998 the Mars Global Surveyor traveled to Mars and flew over Cydonia for the first time. These photos were said to be "...ten times sharper than the original Viking photos," according to the artical.
So on that day in 1998 people tuned in to find out the real truth. A quote from paragraph 7 in the artical states, "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waitng when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing...a natural landform." In the end, it turns out that there was really no alien monuments.
In conclusion, my claim is that The Face is just a naturally occuring landform. First, are Earth landforms that are similar, called mesas. Next, pictures took in 1976, are outdated and have poor pixel quality. Lastly, since April 5th, 1998 there are pictures proving that The Face is just a natural landform. Therefore making my claim true, The Face on Mars is nothing but a natural landform. | 2 |
In my paragraphs I'm going to be talking about how Luke convinced other people to participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program. You should join the Seagoing Cowboys program, because it's an opportunity of a lifetime. Also you can see wonderful things and also tour wonderful places, like Europe and China just like I did. When I joined the program in 1945 World War ll was over and the whole place was ruined (which wasn't very beautiful in my opinion). That is my introduction.
Luke said, "I knew this was an opportunity of a lifetime." You can join this program, because it is just full of interesting sites, and places that you could go see and tour just like I did. "The places that I toured was Europe and China" ,says Luke. When Luke went to Europe which was 1945 World War ll was over and the place was left in ruins. You can also find super interesting and people that have fulfilling minds about all the places in Europe.
To support my claim Luke an some other cowboys had an amazing time on board (The cowboys played baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed) says Luke. He had more fun playing games then he did helping the animals. It took about two weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United Statesand a month to get to China. "Besides helping people, I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and China. Those are my sentences to support Luke's claim.
In conclusion after reading these paragraphs you think about joining the Seagoing Cowboys program, because you can see all the things that maybe you have never saw before. You might have a blast just like Luke did. Luke also played baseball and volleyball with a few cowboys that he hadn't met before you can meet alot of people onboard.(Europe and China was the best tour ever).
Thank you for reading my essay about joining the Seagoing Cowboys program, and I hope you join. | 2 |
Imagine having a piece of technology tell you how you're feeling. I do not think that the use of technology to read our emotions would be valuable in a classroom. If they were used, the students may get mad, it could be a bother to the teacher, or it would be costly and takes regular upkeep.
If technology was used in classrooms, it would not be valuable. The students in the classrooms sometimes want to hide how they feel about someone or something, and having a machine track what they feel, could trigger them. A student can sometimes hide their anger about a student or assignment, but if this was applied, it would be obvious. Another reason they wouldn't be valuable is because if it reads the wrong emotion of someone, they person's anger or emotion may rise and become an even larger ordeal. Someone can already tell what is felt just by looking at someone's face for the most part, as the author stated in paragraph 5, so there is no point to have to have a machine do the same thing. A friend would be also able to see if you are faking a smile or hiding what you really feel. The teachers also are another reason they wouldn't hold any value.
A second reason that the machine is not worth it is because of the teachers responses. A teacher may now see how a student feels about something and this could lead to more disiplinary issues. The teacher may feel annoyed if the students become amused and there would not be a point to teaching. In paragraph six, it says, "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." and this shows that they are becoming like a teacher and this could lead to a decrease in available jobs, kind of like what is happening with robots. The placement of these machines in classrooms could cause more stress on teachers and more to worry about on top of the student's needs. They aren't only a bad idea because of the teachers and students, but also the upkeep.
The final reason they should not be placed in classrooms is because of the price and upkeep. The machines would not be a cheap purchase and the schools have better items to buy for the school. The school my have to hire more people to make sure they are always working and this is also using more of the schools money. The device would be like any other piece of technology and would also require updates. The "Da Vinci Code" would not be totally accurate every time, and that could lead to a disruption. Nick D' Alto says, "Your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile." which shows how complicated the machine is and how easily it could misinterpret emotions.
In conclusion, the placement of technology in classrooms would hold no value. They would be a distraction to students, have negative effects on teachers, and entail a large cost and major upkeep. | 3 |
In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" the author; Nick D'Alto starts off by explaining how The picture shows that "She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry." after telling us this the author proceides by telling us how the emotions were recognized by a computer softwhere. Reading emotions can be tricky. But for a computer its different. The idea of basically reading Mona Lisa's mind and figuring out her emotion is somewhat confusing because the Mona Lisa is just a painting and there is no way to know if the Facial Action System is correct because the painting cant actually tell us how it feels.
In the artical it states that "you can probaly tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." We dont need a Computer to read students emotinal expressions because it is easy to tell how a student is feeling by how their face expresion is at the time or their attitude. even though this would be a great idea to put in classrooms it would also be conserning for the students because some students dont want people knowing how they feel because it might embarious them. But at the same time it would be good for techers because to learn you have to want to learn and if your in a not so good mood then you wont want to learn and with the Facial Action Coding System the teacher can see if the student wants to learn or not.
The mona Lisa demonstration is very intresting and it shows what all a computer can do. It is very amaizing how far the tech has came. Also it is crazy how a computer can know when you are happy or sad. There is a lot of good things to this subject and also a lot of bad things that come with it. An example of a bad thing is if someone dosent want you to know how they are feeling and they could get mad at you. A example of a good reason to see peoples emotion who seem suspious and up to no good.
In concluision I think that it would be a great idea to bring the Facian Action Coding system into schools because of the fact of seeing the emotions of students that arnt learing or working to the best they can be. Another reason is to help inprove those students and see who needs help or needs someone to talk to because they could maybe be going through a hard time but no one knows and the only thing that could figure is out is the computer software. | 2 |
The Face on Mars is in fact not created by aliens, but a natural land form. Although you and many other people believe the conspiracy theorists and their ideas, they are simply untrue and illogical. I hope that my evidence will convince you to stop believing in what is untrue.
First off, when the Face was discovered, it was a surprise among mission controllers back at the Jet Propulsion Lab when it appeared on their monitors. However, the sensation was short lived. Scientists figured out that it was just another Martian mesa. Martian mesas are also quite common around Cydonia, the region where them Face was discovered. Although photographing Cydonia became a priority for NASA, very few scientists actually believed that the Fce was an alien artifact. On Aprril 5, 1998, when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking 1 photos. When the first image appeared on a JPL web site, it rtevealed nothing but a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all.
Since not everyone was satisfied with the images taken by the Mars Orbiter Camera team, because of it being the cloudy winter season on Mars, on April 8, 2001--a cloudless summer day in Cydonia-- Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look. In the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars" Jim Garvin says, "We had to roll the spacecraft 25 degrees to the center of the Face in the field of view. Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution." Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters compared to the 43 meters per pixels in the best 1976 Viking photo. The same article also claims that even after all of that work, the picture actually shows the Martain equivalent to a butte or mesa.
Finally, buttes and mesas are not only common in Cydonia, but also common in the American West, disproving that the Face was was created by aliens. In the article mentioned before, Jim Garvin states that the Face reminds him of the Middle Butte and the Snake River Plain in Idaho, which is a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars.
Ultimately, with all of the research scientists have done on the Face, all of the images taken, and the evidence shown, you can clearly see that the Face is not an alien monument, but only natural landform that just happens to have an odd shape. | 3 |
People have been driving for many years. Cars today have evolved dramastically since the first car came out. Since we have new technology, it means that we have more non-fuel efficient cars. We need to think of a way to cut out all the negative things that cars give us. Paris, for example is banning cars that have an even numbered license plate on Monday. Bogota, Columbia is also banning cars and telling people to find an alternative transportation. Lastly Vauban, Germany is demanding to be "car-free".
Paris has had days of near-record pollution, so they had to think of a plan to reduce the pollution in the air. On Monday motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave thier cars at home of pay a 22-euro fine ($31). The same would apply to odd-numbered plates the following day. Almost 4,000 drivers were fined and 27 people had their cars impounded for their reaction to the crime.
In Bogota, Columbia millions of Columbians hiked, biked, skated, or took buses to work during the car-free day. This day has been going on for 3 years. People faced $25 fine if they violated this event. Citizens were saying that "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower the air pollution". Parks and Sports Centers have been built, old un-even sidewalks have been smoothed out and rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic.
In Vauban, Germany residents of this upscale community are giving up their cars. Street parking, driveways and home garages are generally forbidden in this experiment of being car-free. Car ownership is allowed but there are only 2 places to park; large garages at the edge of the development, where a car owner buys a space for 40,000, along with a home. 70% of Vauban's families do not own cars, and 57% sold a car to move here.
Even though many people still own cars, they still give off bad things for our enviroment. Many cars produce a gas that is bad for the air. Many countries have banned cars on certain days to cut down on air pollution. Paris makes you pay a fine if you are caught driving a car on a certain day. Bogota, Columbia has a specific day that cars are banned and you have to find a different way of transportation. Lastly, Vauban, Germany is demanding to be car-free and have certain ways to have cars but pay for them. If we can keep making acceptions of taking different ways of transportation then maybe we can cut down on air pollution for good. | 1 |
I think it's because venus is the closet plant to earth so it could be dangrous for earth
and human so
they need to study and research more about vesus to see if it's safe or not or if it's effecting earth.
And it also
system says that venus is a challenge plant for people to study
and scientist has found out by studying that the surface is astronomers are fascinated by venus also the solar system
so like i said venus can effect things near to it so that's what they got when they study about venus maybe of they keep studying they are going to find more things about venus.
Their are a lot's of danger over there so he sugest to scienists
to study more about venus so nothing happan on the future to the earth or other things that they are beside venus also they need to expoler more about venus cause it could be some things that they haven't found about venus yet so they can know how far it could be dangerous.
The author suggest that because on this story he found things about venus that he was not sure about and he wanted them to study more about venus to confirm it
for him. | 1 |
Mars, the Red Planet, has been thought to have lifeforms living on it for many years now, by many people. Yet there is no comfirmed evidence that there is life on Mars, or that there was life on Mars. The "face" located in Cydonia, is not a face of anything at all. It is only a mesa. That was naturaly occuring. If there was any life near the "face" on Mars, then the Mars Global Surveyor would have found something.
I know what you are thinking. That NASA is hiding the fact that there are lifeforms or where lifeforms on Mars. If there were, then NASA would have told the world by know. It would help NASA if there was life out there in space. The picture that the Viking 1 spacecraft took in 1976, was to low of a resolution to be seen clearly. In 1998 when another Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia the crew snapped a picture that was ten times sharper than the origional Viking 1 photos. Revealing that the so called monument was a natural occuring landform. Yet many people like yourself, where not satisfied by this conclusion and thought that NASA was covering up the fact that there is or was alien life on Mars.
NASA then prepared another mission to capture another image of the "face". NASA planed this mission for a cloudless sunny day in Cydonia in 2001, so they could get the clearest picture possible. NASA would not risk more money and lives if they already knew that there was life on Mars. It makes no sense. The team that went to capture another photograph, captured one that was the maximum resolution. It would have captured anything that looked out of the ordinary. Including lifeforms and anything they may have left behind.
All of the facts point towards the face being a natural landform and not made by anything but nature. The picture shows the Martian equivalent of a mesa which are comonly found in the American West. One photograph showed what looked like a face. The other two photos, which were taken with better cameras at a higher resolution, show a mesa. The facts are showing that the "face" is not a face at all it is a naturaly occuring land form.
If there was any signs of life, past or present. The Mars Global Surveyor would have found something in 2001. All of the facts point to having no lifeforms build this stucture on Mars. If there was any thing out of the ordinary with this mesa then it possibly could have been built by extraterrestrial life. But there was and is nothing out of the ordinary with the mesa. It is the same type of landform that occurs in the Western part of the United States of America. NASA would not cover up alien life if it was benifical. It is like you burning your money. It helps no one. There is no life on Mars and the "face" that you saw in 1976 is not a "face" made by lifeforms. It is a naturaly occuring landform. | 4 |
Venus is a very unique and unknown planet to us on Earth. Studying Venus would get us insight on what truly the planet of Venus is. Venus gives us many dangerous and hostile conditions, but our knowledge and cluelessness gives us even more curiousity on what the big unknown is. Our knowledge shouldn't be limited to what is possibe but should be limited to what is impossible.
Venus is one of the brightest points in the night sky. Venus is known as the " Earth's twin" while being the closest planet to Earth in density and size. "These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encouter on Earth," stated from the passage. Given this information we can conclude that Venus has some unreal features and are unlike what anyone has ever seen. This planet has so much uniqueness about it and should be evaluted to the most possible limits. It holds many unknown factors of what Venus really is.
Studying Venus could bring so much more insight of the planet itself. The passage states,"Venus stil has some features that are analogous to those on Earth," this means that Venus has some features that are like the features that are present on Earth. Paragraph four states," Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in out solar system," this tells us that Venus could of once been Earth-like, but what made it change? Studying Venus could give us significant information on what Venus once was or maybe even what the Earth will turn into.
Studying Venus could be one of the most complicated and dangerous things ever done. In paragraph five it states," NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float about the fray." This possible solution could help scientists observe and evaluate Venus's surface, but would have to avoid unfriendly gound conditions. "Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans," was stated in paragraph six, it signifies that it is possible to observe Venus, but may not be the easiest mission. Despite risks of the mission," many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus. No matter the risks or how dangerous Venus is, studying Venus would be one worthy pursuit and one of the most innovative and significant observations in history.
As paragraph eight states," Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." Studying Venus would be one of the most worthy pursuits despite the dangers it presents, because it would give us information that could change the way we live today. The planet Venus gives us such curiosity that we meet the very edges of our imagination and innovation. Reading this passage, the author gave us ideas on wondering what happened to Venus, was Venus once Earth-like, and if whether or not the impossible is possible when observing Venus. No matter the dangers persented to us on Venus, studying the planet would be one of the most innovative, extraordinary, and unbelievable missions ever accomplished on Earth, that would give us such insight on our world today. | 3 |
Transportation takes up most of our time. Many of us sit in the cars waiting to get to a place without realizing that we actually spend more time in our car. Transportation is the second leading cause for the emissions in the United States. Car-Free cities are starting to trend in Europe. In the car-free cities you no longer have to worry about where to park. We need to lower the amount of emissions we produce on a daily bases, for America most of our emissions are from gas while in Paris the emissions come from diesel.
Paris has been really polluted, there is much smog that they had decided to ban driving, whoever drove recieved a fine on that day. Paris would take turns on the license plate number to determine if you could drive that day or not. A car-free day in Bogota, Colombia had many people walking, hiking and taking the bus. The streets were free or almost free from traffic jam,violaters who did not participate were fined.
Obama has recently announced that he would like for America to lower the emissions we produce. Statistics show that less people are purchasing cars also there are less people getting their drivers license. In Vauban, Germany they do not just go a day without cars, it is a suburb where street parking are forbidden, it is an expermental site where people are to be without cars. People from there are much happier they no longer have to worry about traffic or congestion they just walk, ride a bike or bus. 70% of Vauban families do not own a car. Cars can cause us to be stressed and it even harms the enviroment.
The advantages would be we'd be more calm and relaxed people rather then trying to hurry and speed in a car. We would also have much clean air. The money that the city gets from the violators would be used to make the community a much better and clean place. Although it is limited it does not mean you cannot use your car, but you may want to live in another area if you keep getting fined. Many people if they choose to walk or ride a bike will become more fit and healthy. Maybe we should consider it even if its just for a day it makes all the difference. | 1 |
In my opinion I think its a good idea to have driverless cars because there would be less car accidents and the cars would change the world. They would use less fuel and they have more flexibility than a bus. The car announces the driver when he or she have to take over. The person in the car doesn't have to do all the work because the car helps them out. Also the car is not all driverless because you can have a turn in driving the car.
The driverless cars would be so much safer. Although they would be very expensive, but they would be worth it. They alert you for many things like pulling in or out of driveways, dealing with traffic, and navigating through complicated roads. The car also alerts you when there is a problem. The cars also has cameras to watch the driver if he or she is focused on the road. This is great because there would be a less possibility of anyone getting hurt.
These cars would make a big differnce in our world and thats why I think we should give them a try. They are so much safer for us and I know people would like them. There would be less car accidents, people getting hurt, and deaths. It wouldn't be the drivers fault anymore if anythng goes wrong it would be the manufacturer. | 1 |
I have mixed feelings about driverless cars for many reasons even though it does have its positive effects. Can these cars be the next step of evolution in the manufacturing industry or can it be hazardous?
Driverless cars do seem like a futuristic idea that does sound very amazing and can possibly happen, lets talk about some of the positves of these cars. Driverless cars are very efficient in the fact of not wasting fuels and or saving fuel as stated in paragraph one. Driverless cars will always be very aware of its own surroundings, they are equiped with sensors to stop the car, alert the drivers, or shall I say "Passangers" of any danger, etc. Google has had these cars go around the country and they have gone more than half a million miles without a single crash, in my own opinion, a car with a driver would have most likely crashed within those miles. Although these cars have their positives, they are also negative because they are not completely "driverless".
These cars are not independent for the most part. They require a driver to be in the car, but stay nuetral until the car needs help moving around an obstacle, for example a traffic jam or car crash. I do not like the fact that this is not a fully independant car, the passanger of the car is supposed to be fully aware of the vehicle and its surroundings while it is moving, but lets be honest, being in a car and not having to drive for once will make the passanger not pay attention to their surroundings, they can fall asleep and or be on their phones, etc, that is a problem. What if the car has an engineering problem and nearly drives off the road or causes an accident, is it the drivers fault or the cars fault? These are the limiting factors that make this vehicle a 50/50 chance of happening, personally I dont want to take a risk with these cars, but I will stay nuetral.
I personally have nuetral feelings about this vehicle it does have its positve effects and its negatives. If manufacturing industries can have a guarentee of the vehicle having no failures or malfuctions with proven tests, I will approve of this idea of "driverless cars". I believe it will be very stunning to see driverless cars, but I care more about the safety of others more than anything. I love the fact that this will cut the amount of fuel used in half, but I do not like the fact that the car can not do everything on its own, so many things can go wrong if the passanger does not monitor the vehicle.
In conclusion, this does seem like a wonderful idea, but it does have its downfalls and possible safety hazards that can or will occur. In my opionion I do not approve of this idea for now. | 3 |
Car usage can be so stressful sometimes. People are in a confined a space for a long period of time, it could smell weird, there's traffic, and then top of that people have road rage. While getting from point A to point B is important people don't have to use cars to do it all the time. Citie's would be able to have all the stores right in one place because there wouldn't need to be space for parking, there would be a lot less pollution in the air, it would be a great source of excersise, and it would be one less bill that people would have to wrry about.
Limiting how much we use the car would have a huge positive effect on the enviroment. It would make the air more breathable, pure, and reduce the amount of smog in the air. For example, in Paris they recently had to ban people from driving in order to reduce the amount of smog in the air. (source 2) People would also be able to save a lot much money too. Imagne never having to pay for gas or the car bill ever again. People would also be able to have more space in their homes, because we wouldn't need the garage to store the car.
Take Vauban, Germany for example. They have given up cars in their city. People can still own cars but you have pay $40,000 just to park the car "at the edge of the development ...along with a [house]." A mother of two, who lived in Vauban, said that " when [she] had a car, [she] was always tense." (source 1) If the U.S. started doing this stores would be able to be placed on a main street, rather than on a highway 20 minutes from the closest nighborhood.
Maybe, other countries could follow Bogota, Columbia's example and just ban cars for a single day every year. It's a good cway to promote people to excersise and stay in shape. It'd be a great opportunity to have fun, spend the day with your family, "take away stress and [reduce] air pollution." (source 3)
So, whether people are reducing their car usage because their city banned cars, they just want to stay in shape more, they want to reduce air pollution, they want save money or they found out that excersising is a great stress reliever. There are a lot of advantages to limiting people's car usage | 2 |
Participate in the seagoing cowboys program. participate because you get to travel. i got to travel on the ss. charels W. wooster with 335 horses, hey, and oat. the cattle boat trips is an unbeliveable oppourtunity. if you were to depart from east United States it would take 2 weeks to cross the atlantic ocean, it gives you time to be excited to get to your location. another reason to join is on one of your trips you have the chance to be night watchman! this is when you check the animals every hour.
Some details are when he traveled on a cattle boat he travled with literally 335 horses, hey, and oat. the reason why the catle boat trip is unbeliveable is because not many people get to do so. the reason why the two week boat trip could be fun is that if your watchman you get to heck the horses every hour. this is some support of why you should participate in the seagoing cowboys program.
In Conclusion, you should participate in this program because it would be a unbeliveable program for you to participate in. this program would be fun if you love traveling and animals.
sohaving to interact with the animals crutial. so ahead and tell your friends about this program. | 1 |
Personally, I think that "driverless" cars are and would be extremely dangerous. They can't react to quick events as fast as a human can. They aren't even fully "driverless" to begin with, a person in the car would still have to be ready at all times in the occasion that something happens. The company or companies technology operating the car to drive automatically could malfunction and or crash at any given time while a person or people are in the vehicle. The main reasons why I don't support driverless cars are because they create an unsafe area and passengers could get too disracted on phones or devices.
The first reason why I don't support driverless cars are because they create an unsafe area for people. I say this because if Google or another company was supporting that over a car, if wouldn't be able to adapt to an area if an accident or something of that nature happpened. Weather might play an important factor on why this system may not be at it's best performance level.
The final reason why I don't support driverless cars is because passengers may become distracted on their phones or devices. There might be a situation that require them to take over and they might be on their phone, thus causing an accident. There might also be other features in the car that require the passenger to take over and they will still be on their phone or device, which could cause a traffic jam.
As you can see, driverless cars are not all that safe, they could be the cause of major deaths and other things. They might be too costly and the wheather might play a huge role on how good these products work. Even though they are considered "driverless", there are going to be a lot of times where the passenger has to take over. | 1 |
The Debate of the Faces
A new technology called Facial Action Coding System, which enables computers to show human emotions by facial expressions, is not valuable to students in the classroom. I do not think that a computer system to read the emotions of students is needed for a quality education. Students have been learning in schools without the Facial Action Coding System for hundreds of years, so why would the Facial Action Coding System help us now? The Facial Action Coding System could actually be unbeneficial to students in the long run. This system could make students feel uncomfortable and insecure about their learning.
The main reason that the Facial Action Coding System is not valuable to students in a classroom is beause it is invading to the students privacy. The students may feel like their emotions are invaded by a computer that is constantly watching them. The Facial Action Coding System could make the student feel like they are being pressured and that their emotions for a certain day can alter their learning style. "Using video imagery, the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movementsin a real face or in the painted face of Mona Lisa" (D'Alto). This shows that the system can watch the students' every move. Would you like to be watched all day by a computer that is reading your mood?
Another reason why the Facial Action Coding System is not needed in the classroom is because many classes in school are taught by a teacher, not by computers. The Facial Action Coding System might not be used at all if the school is taught by a majority of teachers, which could be a waste of money and software. Dr. Huang says in paragraph 6 that 'A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored.' Even though this statement is true about the Facial Action Coding System, many lessons in schools are not taught by computers, but are taught by teachers. The teacher could also probably tell if the students are bored or confused so they could alter their lessons. In paragraph 5, the author says that, "In fact, we humans perform this same impressive calculation every day. For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face" (D'Alto). This shows that the classroom teacher could effectively alter their lesson based on the expressions of the students, just as the Facial Action Coding System could.
In some cases the Facial Action Coding System could be valuable to the classroom and learning environment. If a student is taking online courses or a school is predominantly taught by computer lessons, the Facial Action Coding System would help students stay more focused. The system could try to change the way of teaching based on the viewer's expressions. The system can also be beneficial to ads on computers. "...if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different" (D'Alto). This shows that the Facial Action Coding System could also make ads more interesting for those on computers often.
The Facial Action Coding System is definetly an amazing invention to computers and reading facial expressions. Although it is a great invention, I do not think that schools are ready for a program that studies the students' faces. This technology should not be used so it can protect the students' privacy, make them feel comfortable in the learning environment, and make them feel like their lessons are not forced. Many schools are also probably still taught by a majority of teachers, whearas the Facial Action Coding System would not be needed at all. All in all, it depends on where you fall in the debate of the faces. | 4 |
Many people believe that the 'Face on Mars' was formed by aliens. What do you think? If you were told that the face on Mars was created by aliens, what would you do? What would you say? I know what I would do. I would call them crazy and explain to them that aliens do not exsist and that it was a fact of science.
The 'Face on Mars' is a natural landform. The light from the sun is shone across the landform to make it look like it has two eyes, a nose, and a mouth like a human person, but, if you were to create an exact copy of Mars, put on a different scale, hold it still, and shine light at the exact angle of the sun, you would see that the sun is what really causes the 'Face on Mars' to appear to look the way it does.
Aliens, if they exsisted, could not have created something so magnificent and perfect that at that angle it would look like a face. Scientists have studied the geography of Mars for years and have had nothing to say about aliens. They have prooven their facts and have given us reason to believe that this was simply the way Mars was stuctured and that the rays of the Sun are the cause of it looking like a face.
If aliens did create the 'Face on Mars', why would our scientist have not discovered them? Why havent we ever then seen one before? For those that believe that it was aliens that sculpted Mars, I am sorry, but you are wrong. Mars was naturally formed and can never and will never be changed by aliens because aliens simply do not exsist.
So, for all of those out there in our lovely world that think that aliens do infact exsist and that they somehow, over millions of years created a 'Face on Mars', I would like to say one last thing on my behalf, aliens do not exsist and could not have created something so mindblowing. | 2 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.