full_text
stringlengths 737
20.5k
| score
int64 0
5
|
|---|---|
The using of cars has caused much of the worlds green house gas imitions, in America as much as 50% of the imitions are caused souly by transportation. Many people feel that this is destroying our atmosphere and that we should cut down on imitions by walking, biking or car pooling. Efforts to cut down keep our atmosphere clean and breathable. Some communities such as Vauban, Germany have illiminated car use entirely.
Vauban is a new experimental suburb where there is no street parking or driveways and the only place to park is in a garage where you must buy a space for 40,000 which has cut the car ownership rate down to only about 30%. There are as many as 5,500 residents in Vauban and most of them say they like it much better without having to worry about a car. In many suburbs however the houses are much to far apart for them to be car-free, though many areas are considering developments like this one so they can clean up the air.
Other cities, such as Paris, are fourced to ban driving for days at a time in order to clear the thick smog that hovers above the city. On one day odd numbered plates won't be allowed to drive and on the next day even, volaters are fined $31. As many as 4,000 drivers are fined. Only once the smog was sufficently cleared did they allow both plate types to drive. Limiting driving can prevent problems like this from occuring in all cities.
In Colombia they have a day where all cars are banned, chalanging the inhabitance to find alternate routs of travel for fear of the $25 fine for violators. The day without cars began in the mid-1990's for Bogota, a city with a population of 7 million, has participated, but last year two other cities in Colombia joined in. Dispite the rainy weather many people still hiked or rode their bikes. Many citizens say that it keeps the cities air clear and that its nice to have a day without traffic jams filling the streets. The Day without cars is an event that many countries hope to adopt.
Studies show that many people from the newest generation aren't bothering to get a licence. Cell phones and apps make car pooling easy and the internet allows you to interact with friends without having to drive to visit them. Experts are hoping this trend will continue and that it will cut down the gas imitions. With increased use of social networking technology hopefully people will also become more aware of how they are affecting their planet and move to help others cut down as well.
| 3
|
Driveless cars are the next step in the future, but are they the safest step? Google has been working on these cars for a long time and have had cars that work properly since 2009. With all the technology in the world today it is possible to make these cars, but like cellphones and other devices cars can make mistakes or malfunctions causing the car and person inside to be in danger. If the car were to go wrong, the makers of that car could get in a lot of trouble. Instead of driverless cars to save fuel, there should just be regular cars that are more fuel efficiant. This will keep car companies in buisness, people safer, and driverless car companies out of trouble.
If driverless cars were made, not every company could keep up with these cars. Everyone would want the newest thing and it would cause the smaller car companies to go out of buisness. Making cars that save more fuel would be easier for the smaller comanies to supply than making driverless cars. Driverless cars could also go wrong and put people in danger. If the person was seriously injured, people would see that and not want to buy the cars. This makes all the money the companies spent on cars go to waste because the driverless cars went out of style. Lets say a person was to get injured off a driverless car. That person could then sue the company because they were not the ones driving, the car was. Driverless cars are a bad idea.
Driverless cars should not be made but instead cars saving more fuel should. Cars like a Prius are getting around 50-55 miles every gallon which is amazing. If car manufactions made other models of cars getting the same or close to the mileage that a Prius gets, traveling would be a lot easier. Even though google has been working on these cars for so long, nothing is perfect. There will always be some glitch in a system that could cause the car to go wrong. Driverless cars should not be used and people should stick to regular cars that we use today.
| 2
|
Luke's life changed after high school graduation because of a friend named Don Reist invited him to go to Europe on a cattle boat. And luke went cause he couldn't say no. It was and oppertunity of a life time to him. So he did travel to Europe. Before then Luke had two part-time jobs in agrocery store and a bank when Don Reist invited hom to go to Europe on a cattle boat.
Many countries were left in ruins no food no supplies for them to live off of. So 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA (the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration). Hired,"Seagoing Cowboys" to take care of the young cows and the mules that were going over the sea. Luke and Don signed up for the "Seagoing Cowboys." To help the countrys that were left in ruins because they needed food to survive. And Luke signed up and he said it was awsome to help the countrys that were in need of food and shelter. The seagoing cowboys traveled far across the sea to help countrys in need, they even went to China, and it took a month to get there. Luke had fun being a seagoing cowboy.
It took 2 weeks to get to the United States, and a month to get to China. Carrying animals during the crossings kept luke busy. But Luke was ready because helping out at aunt Katies farm prepared him for the journey ahead. On Lukes second trip Luke served as a night watchman. And he cracked his ribs sliding down the stairs. but Luke also found fun things on the board they did baseball, volleyball, table tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and games helped pass the time. being a seagoing cowboy was more of than a adventure to Luke Bomberger a world was opened to him. Luke was grateful for the oppertunity of being a seagoing cowboy, and the awreness stayed with him, while leading his family a number of of international students and exchange visitors for many years.
| 0
|
It first starts out by saying that we said it was an landform.......We went back to takew another picture where it wasent so cloudy adn foggy to prove to you guys there was no alien involed with this. It was all the landform making this face.we hade rolled the spacecraft 25 degress to center the face in the field
viewso we could get an really good look at this.we took another picture in 2001, we hade the image spand 1.56 meters comparerd to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo.
What the pictuer actuallu shows is the martian equivalent of a buttel or mesa landfroms common arounf the American West. Which this shows that landforms are often made.We stil think that this is
made up of landfrom today. There may still be people out there still thinking that it is made up by aliens but it is trully not. we have anlot of proff leading up to the the theory that it was an landform that made this face.
I would just like to end this on an postive note that we have done a lot of sutdy of this and have taken a lot of pictures so just to say this was made by an landformn. I hope i have changed your mind over this becasue i tried my bes. Just remiber that we have taken alot od pictures and study this a lot to finf the rite answr just for you.
| 0
|
Driverless care i think would be lack of motivation, and could cause lazyness. People around the world would want a driverless car, well because they're not driving it. The computer is, it would probably be another episode of WALL-E where everybody gets fat because our technology is to adavanced. If this situation comes in to play, who knows what would be next. If they started to release these smart cars, would that mean that everybody would have to own one? Since they're so safe. I do not think they should have these smart cars put into play, because it would just change the world, maybe in a good or a bad way, but whos willing to take the chance? The cars would probably cost millions also, with the technololgy that is inside the cars, say the smart cars d crash, would they still have them riding around on the streets?
dont really think so. But to the point, if they were to put these cars on the market, it cost people and companies millions, just start a conflict with the world. I dont think its a good idea.
| 1
|
The face that is on Mars was not created by aliens. We have noticed that aliens wouldn't be able to do this type of thing with just there hands. That the faces on mars had to be created by the storms that have gone through mars the past couple of years. Aliens can't just build a face because they wouldn't know what a human face looks like. The face on Mars has to be either created by storms or it was just a physical feature.
The very first thing that we had thought that had created the face on Mars was aliens, but we had concluded that aliens couldn't have done this the only thing that could do this is the weather. Over the past couple years the face had become more clear possibly because of the strong winds passing by. On Mars they have a lot of sandstorms which could build up over a long period of time. The only thing we could believe was how did they put holes for the eyes in the sand. The sand could have stuck together to form the mouth and the nose. The other thing that could have built the face on Mars is just the physical features that had on it before the sand got blown off of it.
Something else that we cocluded is that the face on Mars had been there for a long period of time before they even noticed physical feature. Before they sent Viking One on Mars they never got a clear shot of the face from a satellite. The face could have been hidden in the sand, and all of a sudden there was a big gusty wind and sand was flying every where. The face started to slowly appear out from under the sand. Over the past couple years more of it was starting to appear onto Mars surface where we could see it better.
The only possible way that the face could have been created was either by storm or already the physical feature that had been on it for centuries. The storm could have done it by the gusty winds and sand building up, or the gusty winds revieling the face. We haven't descovered any aliens on Mars yet so we had to eliminate an option. THe only way that we could conclude if the aliens did build it is see a real alien on Mars. That is what we the scientist have concluded about the creation of the face on Mars.
| 2
|
Electoral College is a great thing and some people might think its not, but there is some wrong things about it like voters vote not for the president, but for slate of electors who in turn elect the president. I'm not going to keep it because its not a good idea and people want to vote for who they want and not vote just so someone can pick who they want like their choice didn't matter. My argument against the electoral college is we might call the disaster factor. The american people consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century; the system allows for mech worse. Consider that state legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people. Back in 1960 segregationists in the Louisiana legislature nearly succeded in replacing the Democratic electors with new elecotrs who would oppose John F. Kennedy. ''So that a popular vote for Kennedy would not have actually gone to Kennedy.'' In the same vein, faithless electors have occasionally refused tovote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please.
Perhaps most worrying is the prospect of a tie in the electoral vote. In that case, the election would be thrown to the House of Representatives, where state delegations vote on the president. The Senate would choose the vice-president. Because each state casts only one vote, the single representative from Wyoming, representing 500,000 voters,would have as much say as the 55 representatives from California, who represent 35 million voters. Given that many voters vote one party for preident and another party for Congress, the House's selection can hardly be expected to reflect the will of the people.
| 1
|
In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author clearly states that they have made new technologies to allow driver-less cars. This can be a good thing and a bad thing. Here are examples on why these cars would change the "public transport taxi system," as paragraph one states.
The driverless cars are a new evolution of taxi's. They are useful in so many ways. The cars are installed with "a video camera on the rear-view mirror, automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor." These cars have multiple safety feautres within them. This would be the safest way to travel without having to do anything but get in and turn it on.
The problem most people are worrying about is malfunctions with the steering and just little bugs the car will have. Although they have taken the prototypes on the road and driven around with them, they all have seem to taken some minor damage. There are problems with almost every car in the world. It all just takes time. The auto steering and autobraking systems in the car make these cars such a hassle.
As paragraph 9 states about the legality and regulations of these cars, "in most states it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars." If we do allow these cars, we will need new traffic laws and make sure that we know who covers the liability. If something goes wrong with these cars, the liability should be put on the manufacturer. Although, they should come up with a "warranty-type deal." That would allow people after so many days accident free after the purchase, to then push the liability onto the manufacturer.
In conclussion, to make these cars safe and able to be driven. Many little and big steps will be needed to make this happen. Laws will need to be changed and liability issues will need to be placed. These cars would be the turn of the 21st century. Although there are some people who don't like the fact that the car will be driven with technology. Even though technology will be applied to this car, you will still be alert when driving because if something stops working you have to take over. That is what most people don't support about these cars. I think this would be a wonderful idea to go through with, but there would be lots of little bugs with it in the first test run of letting everyone have these cars.
| 3
|
The automobile has been a staple in human history ever since it was first created, they have been used by people wether it was grocery shopping or during war. These days limiting car use has more advantages than ever. Such advantages are that it helps reduce the amount of pollution to the enviorment, helps people save money, aswell as it helps people become more sociable and less stressed.
The limiting of car usage has many advantages one would be that it helps to reduce pollution cuased by fuel emissions. Using vehicles creates green house emissions which cause the Earth to become hotter and then global warming becomes a big problem. According to the article "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars." by Elisabeth Rosenthal "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive area in the United States. So limiting car usage reduces the amount of emissions produced greatly. Smog is also a great threat to the enviorment, smog is created just like fog except polluted air gets into the mix of warm days and cold nights. Then instead of getting fog there is smog a more dense unhealthy version of fog. Paris has had a rough time when it came to smog which according to "Paris bans driving due to smog" by Robert Duffer resulted from the fact that "Diesels make up 67 percent of vehicles in France.
Saving money is a big plus to the resriction on car use. With more buildings and shopping centers being built closer to suburban area makes walking a good way to save money. Andrew Selsky author of the article "car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" made a comment on the situation in Bogota saying "parks and sports centers have bloomed throughout the city- new resturaunts and upscale shopping districts have cropped up". With more shopping centers for people to be able to reach by foot, bike, car-pool, or bus can greatly reduce the amount people spend on gas and car repairs.
Limiting the usage of cars also in a strange way helps people become more connected with each other. Limiting car use will alow people to hang out more in things such as carpooling, bike rides, walking, public transportation. Allowing for people to meet more people. Also it wil allow people to use things such as social media to stil feel connected to thier freinds without having to drive out to meet them. In another article by Elisabeth Rosenthal "The End of Car Culture" Rosenthal interviewed professor Mimi Sheller Who stated "the rise iin cellphones and car-pooling apps has facilitated more flexible commuting arranments,includiong the evolution of shared van services for getting to work. The restriction on car usage allows for people to meet new people through the carpool service and such things.
A limitaion on car usage would have so many advntages to people and the enviorment. It helps reduce the amount of pollution from fuel and carbon emissions, helps people save money and not need a car to get to a store or park, and have people become more connected to each other.
| 3
|
keeping the
Electoral College would be the best choice. Selecting the Electors,the meeting for the president and vice president,and the counting of electoral votes by congress is a better idea than 60 percent of voters prefering a direct election to kind we have now. I understand that under the
Electoral College system,voters vote not for the president but for a slate of electors,who turn elect the president. If you lived in texas for instance and wanted to vote for john kerry you'd vote for a slate of 34 democratic electors pledged to kerry,On the off-chance that those electors won the statewide election they would go to congress and kerry would get 34 lectoral votes. Each candidate running for president in your state has his or her own group of electors. The electors are generally chosen by the candidates,s political party, but state laws vary on how the electors are selected and what their reponsibilities are. At the most basic level the
Electoral College is unfair to voters because of the winner take all system in each state,canidatdes dont spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning.
Election by popular vote for the president of the
United States
Obama received 61.7 percent of the electoral votes compared to only 51.3 percent of the popular votes cast for him and romney becausw almost all states award electoral votes on a winner take all basis even a very slight plurality in a state creates a landslide electoral vote victory in that state. A tie in a nationwide electoral vote is possible because the total number of votes 538 is an even number,but it is highly unlikely but each party selcts a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party's nominee it is entirely possible that the winner of the electoral vote will not win the national popular vote. Yet that has happened very rarely. It happened in 2000, when Gore had more popular votes than bush yet fewer electoral votes,but that was the first time since 1888 thats happened. there are five reasons for reraining the electoral college despite its lackof democratic pedigree all practical reasons not liberal or conservative reasons. A disput ove routcome of an electoral college vote is possible it happened in 2000 but it's less likley than a dispute over the popular vote.
| 0
|
Driverless cars are developing in many companies. In the artice the author states that these cars can only steer, accelerate, and break themselves and the driver must do the rest. Driverless cars are not truely driverless because the car still needs the driver to keep a hold of the wheel and take over when there are work zones or accidents ahead. If the driver is still doing a lot of the work, then are these cars even that useful? The answer is no. Driverless cars just bring more danger and conflict into the world.
These driverless cars only do some things on the road. When an issue comes up that the car is not equiped to handle, then the driver must take over. The car must notify the driver to take over. This also means that the driver not only has to be paying attention the entire time but they also have to be holding onto the steering wheel just in case an issue pops up quick. This shows that these cars are not all that safe.
Do we really need driverless cars? It is not that difficult to learn what you need to learn, get your permit, take your test, and then get your licensce. With driverless cars we might not have to go through all that. This means drivers will be less educated and the roads will not be as safe. If drivers in driverless cars already have to be paying attention and holding onto the steering wheel, they might as well just be driving too.
These cars will end up costing so much money to make and we could be using that money for more important issues. Not only will the cars cost a lot but if things on the road need to change like stop lights, road structure, street signs, etc., then that will cost a lot extra too. There are many things we could be spending that money on rather then cars that drive by themselves because we've become to lazy to drive a car ourselves. We could be building new homes, feeding the hungry, fixing buildings, and much more.
Therefore we should stop the developement of driverless cars because they are unsafe and pointless. Google cofounder Sergey Brin believes that these cars will change the world. He believes that these cars will only use half the fuel of taxis now and have more flexibility than a public bus. That all does not matter unless the cars are fully safe and better developed. Drivers might think they can slack with these cars because they are driverless but they actually have to be paying attention the whole time, ready to take over. This will bring questions when accidents happen with these cars like whos fault will this be, the drivers or the manufacturer? We should not be developing driverless cars.
| 3
|
The "Face on Mars" is just a natural landform. There isn't evidence of aliens making it.If it were an alien artifact, we would've seen aliens. Even from the picture from 1976 to 2001, we never saw evidence that there are aliens there. There is nothing on Mars that could've made this so it must have just been nature.
The Face is a Martian mesa. Martian mesas are common enough around Cydonia, so it's possible for them to be in that area. Also, the Face isn't the only mesa on Mars. This one just has unusual shadows that makes it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. These shadows made the pictures illusions because it looked liked a human face.
There are other natural landforms there. Next to the Face is another mesa but it doesn't have the same look as the Face. All of the other things on Mars haven't been made by aliens so this one isn't either. The other landforms on Mars have been naturally made. Lastly, there isn't any other explination for how this was made, so it must have been made by nature.
| 1
|
In recent years car ownership has decreased with positive consequences. Life with out cars has its advantages. It is reducing the amount of emissions put into the air, cars are resposible for 12 percent of green house gas. Life without cars can also relive stress.
An experimental car free community in Germany called "Vauban" completed in 2006 is a town where 70% of its residents do not own cars and the streets are completely car free. It's constructed so everything is within walking distance. This means no need for cars, wich means little to no polution. People usaully bike or walk to their destination in Vauban."when I had a car I was always tense. I'm much better this way" says a Vauban resident. Vauban is a component of a movment called smart planning. As you can see, a community with no cars is prospering aurgurably better than one with cars. People are less stressed and pollution is heavily reduced. A life/community with no cars has little to no negative results.
"After a near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air oof the global city." france need a solution to reduce the smog, so they banned even-numberd license plates on monday and odd on tuesday. with some exceptions such as electric cars and hybrids. After five days of heavy smog and no cars, smog congestion was reduced to 60 percent. Here is another perfect example how decreasing cars on the street is directly linked to pollution decrease .because they took away cars, pollution was heavily decreased. This is a huge advantage that limiting car usage has.
The USA has always been a car culture, but things are changing for the better.
car liscense ownership rates have only decreased since 2005. this means we are putting out less emissions than 12 years ago! we are eqaul to where the country was in 1995. the reasons vary as to why lisence ownsership is decreasing but so far it has its advantages. People are car pooling more and using bikes and walking to their destination. the only negative side of limited car usauge is for the car industry. with less cars on the road, they get less money. But overall people will benifit from this.
Limiting car usage has huge advantages and I encourage you to try walking or biking rather than using your car. You will become more socail, fit, and help prevent pollution.
| 2
|
Limiting car usage is a great idea. If this ever does happen it will be a new Revolution for us all. Some might say that its outragious and unthinkable but it will benefit us in many ways. If we limit car usage there will be less polution, less stress, less traffic, more outside activities which means being healthier and last but not least it will be safer.
To begin with, with limited car usage there will be less polution and less stress. Most of our polution comes from cars, the smoke that the engine of the car lets out causes it. For example, Paris suffered a "near-record pollution" (source 2) due to the diesel. But after they enforced a fine of 22- euro "congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France"(source 2). Don't you think that this is a positive outcome and this is benefiting us? Polution is a very important issue in the United States and we need to fix it or at least try. Now lets talk about stress, everybody has stress even if its from school, work, family ect. And everybody wants to have the least amount of stress as possible or no stress at all. If we limit the car use that will be taking a stress away from oneself, "when i had a car i was always tense. I'm much happier this way,"(source 1). Because that way parents dont have to worry whether their kids will get home safely. They wont have to worry about if they got into an accident, if after the pary they drived home intoxicated. Car accidents are very common in the United States and has caused many deaths so why not reduce that number,of deaths, and reduce car usage in the process? And not only for parents ,but elderly's as well because some senior citizens still drive with or without license and that could cause a mayor incident.
Furthermore, by redusing car usage there will be more outdoor activities which means that it will be a lot more healthier. Think about it, by driving a car you dont exercise but if a person walks to a place, they are exersicing. For example, in German Suburb people have a limited car usage and you can hear the "swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drown out the occassional distant motor"(source 1). The person could hear the outside activity and not the sound of cars passing by which means there was interaction between folks. Also, "parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city..."(source 3) and isnt the government,especially Michelle Obama, trying to always give out messages of not only eating helathy but playing outside and interact with the community? well this is one way we can support that. Plus in this 21st century kids are always on their phones, tablets, computer and when they go out its to hang out with friends at the movies a party but they use cars. If the car usage is limited they wont have that many options and they could interact outside of their little "bubble". What ever way you look at this its gonna be a positive outcome even if its small.
Moreover, by reducing car usage there will be definetely less traffic and it will be a new beginning. To prove this points, in Bogota, Colombia "million of Colombians hiked, biked, skated ot took buses to work during a car- free day yesterday, leaving the street of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams" (source 3). People hate traffic, it has not been known a person that doesnt. So, reducing car usage is equal to reducing traffic jams, why not do it then? Now it was never said that there will be absolutely no cars just the decrease with it. There will be public transportations like taxis and buses but even if those where still be able to be used there wont be as much traffic. It is understandable that people sometimes need to get to places where you cant really walk to get there so the public transportation will be permitted. Also this will mean a "new beginning", Enrique Riera, mayor of Praguay said "These people are generating a revolutionary change, and this is crossing boreders," (source 3). This statement says it all a "revolutionary change" its what we need. People are depending in cars so much and thats not good.
To end this thoughts, it is a great idea to limit the usage of cars. People will have one less thing to worry about and who woulnt like that huh? Also it will be healthy for the environment and the citizens and lets not forget, there will be less of a traffic jam. Plus it will be a big change but at the same time it wouldnt because statistics have shown that " Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by" (source 4). So it already started little by little we just have to accelerated the process a bit more."As of April 2013, the number of miles driven per person was nearly 9 percent below the peak and equal to where the country was in January 1995" (source 4),just think about all the positive outcomes of this change.
| 4
|
The auther suggests that studying is a worthly pursuit despite the dangers it presents. Like Venus is even more challanging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venu's atmopsheric. Its more extreme than anything that a human encounter on earth. Venus has the hottest suface temperature of any planet in our solar system. Venus would be the place where there would be lots of problems like not easy conditions.
when using phones, tablet to acid or heat capable of melting tin. I feel like we would need more advanced things from earth in Venus because Venus would have the hottest suface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though mercury is closer to the sun. "It would the most challenging in exploring venus". The venusian geology and the weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightningstrikes to probes seeking to land on its surface.
And the most entresting thing is that somtimes Mars and Venus are closer to earth. Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has a value, not only because of the insight on the planet in how it had lots of bad things, but we still would have the good things that would we need to make people to survive in venus. 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.
| 1
|
"Huge rock fomation. . .which resembles a human head....." Was created by aliens; or was it. People come up with some insane conspiracy's from how people who have died are still alive or that amusment parks are haunted by the dead... but this is the craziest one. People actually believe there is life on Mars, and that it created a face do you?
The "Face" was not created by aliens. For you to say the the "Face" was created by Extra Terriestrials it would be like saying that the conspiracy theory that the faces has "haunted grocery store checkout lines for 25 years" is real like how is that possible. Also the exsits of aliens is "evidence that NASA would rather hide..." (Instead then sharing it with the public they rather not worry the world.)
So what, do you still believe that something that has no proof to even exsits still created a faces on the plant Mars? Or do you now believe that it's just a natural landform? People actually believe there is life on Mars, and that it created a face do you?
| 1
|
Is studying venus a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents.
I belive that it is a worthy pursuit that will take our inovations to the next level because its a planet that has givin us a great couriosity to explore and can also help us create machines that expand our reserches trough its grounds.
it also help us discover further knowlidge by sudying venus we can take our imagination and inovationt to our furthest we are learning further ways that can take human technology to expand and also humand kind in finding other planets we can survive in.The technology being used in venus and help us take it to other planets risking the the dangers and challenges we may face in the reasearche of this land.
The reaserches being done from venus help us see different temptures that may not be easy conditions,but survivle to human kind
and might help us see different ways we can survive in different temperature above the ground surface taht help us survive in venus and also on earth.
The expirement taking on board for venus can expand many of our reasearches of other planets and also expand the tempetaures our technology can take a see we see in the article we don't imagine that a phone or tablet or any of our technology being take on acid or in very high temepratures is going to survive and by traying to find ways that our technology takes all the heat from venus is going to take a lot of effort to be done to find a way to be done in order for our technology to survive taking the temperatures from venus and making a similar expirence and exposing our technology might help us create our own technology stronger.I also belive the author should of put a little more infromation as why he thinks it is nececery to explore venus however if we send machine to the grounds on venus its only giving us a limited insight on the grond we also need to discover the atmoshepere of venus,the climate,the max tempeture and the min tempeture of venus.
| 2
|
In most parts of the United States cars are our everyday transportation. We use cars in our everyday lives to transport us everywhere, whether it is from home to work or school and other places. What alot of people don't realize is all the advantages that not driving a car everyday has. If we were to use less vehicles in the U.S it would incourage most people to excercise more and have a healthier lifestyle. It would also help our environment be less polluted. Finally it would also help improve safety by decreasing the ammount of car accidents we have every year.
By not using a car every day, people would have to find other ways of transportation like riding bicyles or just simply walking everywhere. In the U.S we have a large percentage of obese people. I think this would help a large ammount of people lose weight by being more fit in there everyday lifes. It would incourge these people to play sports and go to parks more often. Our community would be much healthier and happier.
Not only will this new idea help our community but it would also help our environment be healthier by conserving resources and the atmosphere would be less polluted. Because we use cars everyday it has caused alot of air polution which is one of the many reasons why the ozone layer has been getting damaged. This would also benefit us by having better air to breathe. Our environment will be healthier and nicer for us to enjoy.
Finally this would help reduce the ammount of car accidents we have every year in the U.S. Most deaths in the U.S are caused by car accidents. By reducing the ammount of time we drive cars it would improve our safety and the ammount of deaths each year would be reduced. This would also be a benefit to our community because it would increase the number of our population.
Our lifes would be healthier and safer by not using cars every day. this would benefit us all and our environment. People should take these advantages in consideration and think about this next time they drive a car.
| 2
|
The Electoral College is a system where elected senators from each state vote for the next president of the United States Of America. But doesn't voting belong to the hands of the citizens? Citizens of the U.S should pick their president without the hand of the state senators that would vote for the other canidate. The state of Wyoming representing 500000 voters have as much say as the senators from California with 35 million people and more. The Electoral College is a flawed sytem in which the senators not the people choose their next president.
The Electoral College should have less say in the next presidency because of the "Winner take all" system in which candidates don't spend time in areas they know have no chance at getting their votes. These canidates would only then go for the Swing states and not even try to get the votes of the other states. Leaving the fate of the next president in the hand of a few is not a reasonable act. Although few citizens of America know the complex working of the government and need the knowledge of the senators to get the right vote. The goverment should know that giving the right to vote to only a few people is not a good solution to the problem. The problem lies where the senators not the people vote for their next prisent.
The prime example of a canidant that won the popular vote but loss on the Electoral vote was Al Gore. George W. Bush won the election with only 5 Electoral while Gore won the peoples votes. Only 5 people were able to change the presidental election, this is exacly why people should be the one to vote for their presidents not the other way around. This flawed system brings out the question that "are we really voting for the president or our senators?" it is the latter. The peoples votes aren't for the president but really is for the senators that then vote for the president. But the senators would then only vote for the president that would only for for the mijority of the people not the minority.
Electoral College should be replaced with a popular vote system that allows for more equal voting amoung the people instead of a few. The Electoral College should be instead a advice System giving people an idea of who to choose and tell the people what the president is looking for and what to do. With this new system presidents would actually go for the states that they knew wouldn't have voted for them before and at least try to get a few votes out of the smalle places that would vote for them. All in all the Electoral College has many flaws and holes, but in the end the people should the ones to vote their president not the senators.
| 2
|
Going to Venus without any complications would be a dream. To travel there and just be able to land on it's surface without any damage would be a miracle. If you're travelig to any planet it's going to be difficult, but if you're travelling to Venus that's a whole other story.
The author knows the dangers and problems that could occor, such as: the temetures being too extreme, the time it would take to get there and the limited insight on ground condistions. But dispite these problems he's still finding ways to pursue the idea of people goung to Venus. Theyr're working on a new study that has to do with silicon carbinate electronics, and putting them in a chamber to simulate the effects of the surface on Venus. The electronics only hold up to three weeks, but they still haven't given up. They've even started to look back at mechanical computers, these use levers and gears to opporate. They've been looking at these again because, you couldn't bring a normal laptop or computer up there because the temetures are so extreme.
In concussion, I think the author does support his idea. He gives reason why it would be dangerous, but also tells us that it would be worth it. The author says that the dangers and doubts shouldn't limit us, and we should be using our imagination for what could happen in the future.
| 2
|
Driverless Cars
Creating driverless cars in the world seems like a big deal today. In all reality, having driverless cars around the world can be an accident just waiting to happen. If you really think about it, teenagers would most likely be the main ones buying driverless cars. Drinking while driving, texting, and falling asleep may accur when entering a driverless car. Is creating a car that drives on it's own really worth costing a life?
Drinking when driving is a huge mistake people tend to make. Giving them a car that works on its own, and allows you to sit there and get more drunk is not a very bright idea. "They still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents." If you are drunk and the car alerts you to take control you may not even respond.
Texting and driving happens with anyone and everyone. People are way too focused on seeing what their friend sent them instead of paying attetion to the road. Alot of collisions have happend because of one driver texting and driving. " Without the option of smarter roads, manufacturers turned to smarter cars- but how much smarter did the cars need to be? For starters they need a whole lot of sensors." Say those sensors just happend to suddenly cut off and not give any warning. How will a person know when to look up from their addictive phone?
Working hard days 24/7 can make a person extreamly sleepy. Say you get off of work and your exhausted, and a peaceful song comes on the radio. While listening to that song you fall into a deep sleep while your car takes you back to your house. "Their cars have driven more than half a mile without a crash." Maybe the test cars didn't have a problem with the driverless cars but what if somthing breaks in your car and it loses control? The sleepy driver is in deep sleep and could die from the driverless car manufacturing.
In conclusion, having a driverless car does not make the world any safer nor better. It gives people a better chance to drink and drive, text and drive, even sleep and drive. How is making driverless cars anysafer yet better to the world?
In all reality, it makes it more dangerous.
| 3
|
Everyone knows our solar system and all the plants we have everyone always talks about earth or mercry but no one brings up Venus why? Venus is dangerous to study but also very cool at the same time. The author suggest that venus is worthy to be studied despite the dangers because venus is very challenging, and non-normal
The author suggest that venus is worthy of studying because it's challenging. Venus is the most second closest to the sun behind mercry and infront of earth "it has proven a very challenging place to examine more closely" in this quote from the article basically states that Venus can be very different to examine up closely thus making it hard for people to study venus.
The author also suggest that venus is worthy of studying because it's non-normal. "Venus can also be called "Evening Star" is the brightest points of light in night sky" this quote from the article tells us that Venus has the brighest light that no other planet has. On Venus it's 800 degrees fahrenheit and the pressure is 90 times greater then on earth that's not for a normal planet for it to be 800 degrees that's bruning hot. Venus alsp has erupting valcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frrequent lighting strikes. That dangerous enough for you?
Venus isn't like any other planet with high tempertures, erupting valcanoes, and etc. Now if you had a chance to study Venus would you dangerous or not Venus sounds really cool to look into for reserch. Venus is a very cool planet with the brightest light in the sky.
| 2
|
"The more technology we have the more knowledge we loose. The more technology we have the more lazy we get." Cars could fundamentaly change the world. In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author presents both postive and negative aspects of driveless cars. Driverless cars have a more negative aspect than a positive aspect because it can cause many accidents, they're expensive and they are too smart.
Driverless cars are faster than any other car ,a lot of people are facinated with them but the fact that these cars can steer, accelerate and brake themselves can cause many accidents. These driveless cars dont drive through work zones and around accidents. The car will require the human's attention whenever there's a problem. if the techonology fails whose fault is it? the drive or the manufacturer?
One of the biggest concerns about driveless cars is that they're really expensive baecause they have many expensive sensors;sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camara mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors and a GPS. imagine how much all of these things could cost? very expensive and what if one day you wake up and the car doesnt work? imagine how expesive it is going to be to fix it.
Lastly, Driveless cars are too smart. They have a very advanced technology. They have all thse sensors and too much technology can be very dangerous for humans, tis technology is not nessesary for hiumans.
in Conclusion, Driveless cars can be very dangerous but a a lot people would love to buy them just for the simply fact that it can be more practical, that way the dont have to drive to store if they dont want to or to their jobs or even to another state. There is only four states that have approved the use of this cars. Manufactures believe that more states will follow as soon as the cars proved more reliably safe.
| 2
|
With in this article, there are many arguments regarding the self-driving cars. Many positions for opposing and agreeing with the cars can be seen. I, for one, am supporting the idea for self-driving cars. I believe with enough work, these cars will be safer for the roads, and for their passengers.
"Within 10 years, those sensors had become more advanced to detect and respond to the danger of out-of-control skids and rollovers." [5] This proves that with enough work, this kind of technology can be improved tenfold.
"In 2013, BMW annonced the developemnt of 'Traffic Jam Assistant.'" [7] This states that the new technology is being invented all the time. We never really stop inventing, improviong, revising, and publishing new things.
With that, self-driving cars will hopefully make for a better commute, with better saftey. It would be a nice advantage to see cars with a function that tests for sobriety, leading to a safer roadway. That, and many other functions that can be implimented into everyday life can make our cars better.
So, would self-driving cars be safer? In my opinion, yes they would. We could possibly have a safer network of roads, and a lesser ammount of accidents, and a lesser amount of fatalities regarding self-driving cars.
| 2
|
With the aging of time comes the advent of new technology. One specific development in this modern era is none other than computer-driven cars. This progression, however, has indubitably raised the question: should we have them or not? While computer-driven cars may cause responsibility issues in times of accidents, ultimately society will experience a higher degree of safety and convenience; thus, it is only neccessary that they be implemented and replace what defines driving today.
Computer-driven or "driverless" cars undoubtedly provide more safety to all drivers and pedestrians than cars driven completely by humans. Currently, there are my types of people with the priviledge of driving, whether they be old, young, or even disabled. While the fact that this priviledge is accessible to many seems great, this could lead to disaster; young drivers have more of a tendency
to drive under the influence of drugs or alcohol and old or disabled drivers may be oblivious to anything on the road. However, with the advent of driverless cars, those who may not be as strong in driving do minimal work to get to where they want. In paragraph 7, it claims that the "BMW announced the development of Traffic Jam Assistant," which is a car that can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph. Also, these driverless cars can even "steer, accelerate, and brake themselves . . ." Lastly, features such as "flashing lights on the windshield and other heads-ups displays" are under consideration. With all these new aspects entwined, any type of driver would benefit simply due to the fact that do not have to do as much of the driving anymore. Ultimately, this would indubitably lead to increased safety in society, as both drivers and pedestrians no longer have to worry about performing careless mistakes that would inevitably cause major issues on the road.
Not only would driverless cars increase the level of safety on the road and benefit every civilian, but also they would provide much convenience. In paragraph one, it addresses this notion with "He (Brin) envisions a future with a public transportation system where fleets of driverless cars form a public-transport taxi system." Today, in many over-populated countries such as China, the amount of transportation on the road is so extreme to the point where car-owners can only drive on specific days of the week. However, with this system of driverless cars, everyone has a guaranteed opportunity to ride in a car everyday. Additionally, this adds convenience to environmental groups and activists due to the fact that, as mentioned in paragraph one: "The cars
he(Brin) forsees would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus." Now, with these driverless cars, protecting the environment would become an intrinsic phenomenon. Thus, with the implementation of driverless cars, there would be an undoubtable increase in the level of convenience to society.
It still must be acknowledged, however, that these driverless cars can cause responsibility issues when there is an accident (mentioned in paragraph 9). While this may be the case, it is, in the end, trivial; with new system features mentioned in paragraphs 6 and 7, very seldom will one see accidents. Additionally, this problem of responsibility could be avoided in the first place with the implementation of a recording device in every driverless transport. By doing so, it will reveal if it was the fault of technology or the driver that caused an accident. In the end, this concern of liability and responsiblity is outweighed by its own trivialness and the fact that driverless cars offer much more (safety and convenience).
Driverless cars should be industrialized and ultizied in society in the near future because of the fact they offer maximum degrees of both safety and convience to many members of society. While there lies the concern that driverless cars will cause responsiblity issues when there are accidents involving it, one must consider the fact that these accidents in the first place are seldom to occur; furthermore, this concern can easily be avoided altogether with new methods such as videotaping both the inside and the technology itself to determine what caused the accident.The progression of time has led to the taking of many steps for technology; it is technology such as driverless cars that we must welcome.
| 5
|
A computer that could detect and read human emotions would benefit every student in the classroom, not just those who are shy or may become confused. A computer such as the one described in the article would allow teachers to better reach their students than previouls before. While restrictions on this technology would be necesary for its implimentation, the software could prove to be invaluable in a classroom setting.
The software in this article can be used to improve the quality of material in a lesson, while not allowing the student to complete an assignment without thinking critically about it. However, a system like the Facial Action Coding System (FACS) could be seen as a means to increase the number of students in a single class. This would not be the case, a resurce such as this would be used as a teaching assitant in the classroom, not a replacement for a teacher. In the article, Dr. Huang suggests, "...it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." FACS could be used as either a secondary lesson plan if the students in a class cannot comprehend the material or as a studying assistant when the students arrive at home.
A system that could detect when a student is stuggling or bored would allow the the teacher to be more effective when engaging their students. Often times, what happens in a
classroom is students become confused and do not want to ask questions and fall further behind, hindering their learning process. As Dr. Huang predicted "A classroom compter could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,". A classroom computer such as this ensures a student remains on task, and does not fall behind if they become confused by the material being taught to them. The addition of the computer would be an tool to improve the quality and effectiveness of the teachers lesson.
This technology has numerous applications in the classroom and could be used to more effectively communicate ideas and material while still being limited in its capabilities. Thus creating a safe and more engaging learning environment, catching students who fall through the crack and bringing them up to the same level as those who fully grasp the topic.
| 3
|
Man conquered its environment with advancements and technology, they make life easier but some are harmful to our environment. Automobiles were derived from carriges but unlike carriges automobiles requiered some kind of power to run on. Most vehicles in modern day run on gasoline, Diesel, or electricity. They make transportation easier for us but like every good apple it has its rotten side. Fumes produced by the burning of Diesel and Gasoline are harmful to our ozone. The fumes produce a green-house like effect and trap in the heat contributing to global warming. Although Desiel engines have improved and are now cleaner our atmosphere is still taking a sucker punch. Almost every family in the United States owns an automobile, thats millions and millions of people driving increasing carbon emmisions. If less people used their personnal vehicle they could save money and diminish the amount of pollution produced by their automobiles. There is no way we can obliterate car use because we have built our world centered on car use but we don't have to stop driving we could simply reduce our impact by using public transportation, walking or riding a bicycle. Walking or driving a bicycle could relieve stress while commuting and traffic jams increase your stress level do something for yourself and our environment and decrease your stress level.
The are many many reasons to decrease our reliance on automobiles yet even with many benefits we refuse to do our part. The amount of fossil fuels available in earth is limited, in the past decades we have used much of it there will soon come a day when we will experience a shortage of fossil fuel. The day will come regardles of anything because of our relaince in this source of power but we can slow down its arrival by using less. Americans use thousands and thousands of dollars a year to fill up their tanks, when they could walk or car pool and save money. They could use that money to pay bills, make improvements in their home or make a college found for their kids. Yet many preffer to drive and just burn their money away. The use of public transportation doesn't only save you money it can increase your comminities economy.
While i'm all for saving money there is a greater cause then just saving money. Although is obvious we could all use a few extra bucks in our wallet we could also use a healthier planet. We breath in the fumes that automobiles produce, carbon is not good for us its a health hazard. We are polluting the air we breath our body needs oxygen not carbon and yet that's a high percentage of what our lungs inhale. There is also the concern that carbon emissions are causing holes in our ozone layer. The ozone protects us from all the harmful rays that the sun emmits like Uv-rays. There has been an increase of people sufferring from skin cancer in the last decade. why you may ask, well carbon emissions make holes in our ozone layer which in essance allows harmful sun rays to reach us. With a certain amount of exposure to radiation our cells experience mutations caused by the harmful rays and essancially give birth to cancer. Many people die because of this disease and we lament their loss but not enough to make a change. Pollution produced by automobiles has many negative effects on our environment, and health. We could decrease the damage by doing our part and leaving our car parked in the garage.
If saving money and having a cleaner environment isn't a good enough reason to limit you car usage then do for your own health. There is more to life then just driving impatienlty in a car you could walk and enjoy nature. Our reliance on cars is unhealthy for us and our environment. We are polluting our beautiful planet and causing an increase of health hazards. There is only so much fossil Fuel left we can waste it all at once or make it last a little longer. I myself enjoy the pleasure of just driving to a store rather than walking but i preffer a healthy environment over a car ride. Do your part walk, take a bus, or car pool with your friends. Every grain of sand counts.
| 3
|
Venus is one of the planets that have the same density and size and used to have mountains,valleys,craters and it also used to have oceans which means it used to have life but the pressure will kill us because the pressure is 90 times stronger than ours.
It is hard to go to venus because sometimes we are farther and sometimes we are closer to venus. All of our space missions to venus have been unmaned because no spacescrafts hasnt survivded the landing longer than a few hours. on the planets surface the atmodspheric pressure is 90 time than on our own planet. venus used to be covered with oceans and had valleys. mountains and craters. NASA want to send people to study venus. a vehicle would be needed to hover across venus surface. systems made by mechanical devices will by crushed by the pressure.
So the exploration of venus will be difficult but we will soon need a planet because once we run out of material we wont be able to go anywhere.
| 0
|
cowboy that rode the waves is about a man whose freind signed him up and he took care of animals on a boat. the animals were for people in other countrys resuply threir food scourse.
a reason to join is beacause youd be helping alot of people thrugh tough times. also it gives you opertunitys to see interesting places. you also get to have fun aboard the boat and it teaches you how to work with animals.
luke was just ourt of high school working at a mini mart when his freind came and sighned him up for see cowboys. when luke got their he was 18 so he inlisted in the army but they said just keep doing thet for your service. wile luke worked on the cattle ship hewent many places. he went to europe and china also veinece italy and crete. it took a long time to get to theese places though. it takes a month to get to china and a weak to get acrost the atlantic. luke worked on his aunts farm as a boy to so that prepared him. it didnt prepair him for the dangerouse situations though. on lukes second trip he seved as a night gaurd he fell down a latter and almost fell into the sea at night. he was lucky to be alive but he couldnt work for 2 days beacause of cracked ribs.
| 1
|
Venus, our Earth's twin, is the brightest star in the night sky. Due to it's dangerous conditions we have not been able to explore this planet as much as we would have liked. In the passage, "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author points out many reasons on why we should in fact be studying Venus, despite Venus' bad conditions.
Firstly, he states," 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". By comparing Earth to Venus he begins to point out that studying Venus could very much help us understand much more about our own planet. Although Venus has different surface qualities today, long ago venus was one of the closest Earth like planets, surface wise, that we know of today." Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." The author pushes the fact that Earth is comparable to Venus.
Next, the author offers the idea that we should explore Venus because we need to be fearless to grow mankind. He states,"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." He is saying imagine what we could do if we were not afraid of what we could and couldn't do. We must step out from our confinment of our planet to grow and learn.
Lastly, the Author goes on to say that we should take on this challenge because then we will be able to tackle other problems with traveling out into space. "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." He also lists ways Nasa has began working on solutions to study Venus. The author states these reasons in the passage to prove that this challenge has helped Nasa grow and think about new technology that could potentialy help later on.
To conclude, throughout the passage, the author strongly supported his idea on why we should study Venus despite Venus' challenging conditions. Through saying studying venus will help us understand our planet, to helping mankind and to even helping us expand our knowledge in space, he has soldifyed why going to venus is strongly supported.
| 3
|
After reading "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the authors idea that study Venus is a worthy pursuit, did not meet all criterias. The author provided many facts about the planet Venus, but didnt give a clear explaination on why we should pursuit the study of Venus. In paragraph 8, the author's reason to pursuit the study of Venus was that "our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation," the author has a valid point on that we should try to go beyond our limites, but he also relies on the fact of human curiosity and the gained insight of the planet itself. He does not take into concideration that we have attempted to explore Venus, but failed because the tempeter is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit and has a pressure that is over 90 times greater then we have experienced.
In paragraph 2 and 3, it shows that we know the risks of trying to travel to Venus, with many attempts that have failed, and with the information about the planets thick atmosphere, that is almost 97 perent carbon dioxide and clouds of sulfurice acid, one small mistake could cause the whole mission to fail. With the information we have now, we know that the planet Venus is curently changing and getting hotter, it includes that "not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades." In paragraph 5 and 6, it provides us with the information that even if we are able to travel to Venus, we would have to stay close to the sea level on Earth keeping us at a safe air pressure, we would have to be 30 or more miles above and the temperatures would still be around 170 degrees Fahrenheit.
In conclusion the authors idea to travel to Venus does not lead anywhere, his claim is not well supported and is made up of him own curiosity and he does not give a vaild reason. Travling to Venus is not a worthy pursuit that we should do, without our imagination and innovation met, we are forced to work harder to achieve our goals and to do more.
| 2
|
Hey,how are you today. Well I am here today to tell you why it would be a great idea for you to participate in the Seagoing program.
The reason i think it would be a great idea for you to participate in the Seagong program is because I just got done reading a artical called,'' A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves,''.And in this story the author gave me many reasons on why it would be a great idea to participate in the program.
The first reason on why it would be great is if u enjoy caring fo animals then the Seagoing Cowboys program is the place for you. The reason i say this is because the UNRRA hired''Seagoing Cowboys'' to take care of the horses,young cows,and mules that were shipped overseas.
Another reason on why it would be a great idea is the experience to visit many unique places,for example if u like to travel and visit places you can have the side benefit of seeing Europe and China or even better you can see the special sight of the Acropolis in Greece. Also you can take a gondola ride in Venice,Italy,which is a city with streets of water. Another great thing about it is that you can tour a excavated castle in Crete and marvel at the Panama Canal on your way to China. But if your lazy and non disaplined i dont think this is a good trip for you because you have to be prepared for hard work .
One other reason on why it would be a great idea is because if you like to have fun and enjoy yourself than this would be great for you because you can find time to have fun on board,especially on return trips after the animals have been unloaded. The cowboys play baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed. Table-tennis tournaments,fencing,boxing,reading,whittling,and games also helped pass the time.
| 2
|
Boom! Your teacher just asked how you are feeling and you smile and say "I'm just fine."
Then your computer reads the way your muscles moved while talking to your teacher and realizes that your are bored and not interested. So the software in your computer can tell how you feel. A professer from the Beckham Institute for Advanced Science at the Universit of Illinois has created a software that can read your emotions. The way the software can do this is by seeing how the muscles in your face move. This would be very useful in a class room setting, lets see why.
In the painting of the Mona Lisa the software said she was 83 percent happy, this is judged by her eyes and the form of her smile. The software would help in a class room setting by letting the teacher know that the students are bored or not paying attention. This could also allow the teacher to get those students who aren't paying attention involved. The value of this is unmatchable and could help in a multitude of ways.
The way the software works is by seeing how each individual muscle moves and where it moves too. For example if you move your lips up and make your eyes squint the software will reconigize a smile, which would indicate happiness. A normal at home PC could not run this software, although the researchers are trying to make it a more condensed process.
So the software could be helpful inside of a classroom setting and could help keep students on task and allow teacher to know when the students are not on task. Many problems could be solved with this software. Dr. Huang has made a big impact on the side of emotional feelings and being able to judge if somebody is happy or sad,
| 2
|
Venus is the nearest planet to our Earth. Exploring it will be an important job because people do not a lot about Venus. The author support his idea of studying Venus despite dangers condition such us high temperatures, atmospheric pressure, and each previous mission have be fallen.
Venus the nearest planet to our planet have a very high temteratures. High temperature makes hard for Atronomers to explore venus but the author still want to learn more about it. The article state "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system". That quot show how much the Aeronautic and Apace Administration wanted to explore our nearest planet, and because people know a little about Venus the NASA's want to know about it.
The author still show that he want to explore Venus despite atmospheric pressure. The atmospheric pressure is about 90 times greater than what people experience here on Earth. The author state that "recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel". The quot shows that he wanted to explore Venus long time a long, and he is doing what he can now to be able to go to Venus. He still have faith that one day he will to Venus despite many challenges.
Some previous mission have fallen because of the spacecraft was not good enough, but now there working on making on new spacecraft that will be able to land for faw days or weeks to be able to explore more about Venus. The article state that "some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating that chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such condions". The quot shows that they are working on new electronics to help them explore Venus, and learn more about it. The author do not want to let dangers or doubts to stop the from exploring Venus.
Venus the closest planet to our planet have a lot things that people do no know about it. But despite bad condetion the author as coclude to not let an thing stop him from exploring Venus. People knows that exploring Venus will be hard work to accomplish. Many of us are hoping that soon they will be able to accomplish their dream.
| 2
|
The author supports his/her idea well with all the details they gave of the temperatures and conditions of Venus. Although it seems near impossible, the author leads one to believe that exploring Venus' surface may be more possible than it looks at first glance. There are metals that could survive such conditions.
While floating 30 or so miles above the surface of the fireball-like planet might give us more insight than we already have, to really acquire significant information, we need to get right down on the ground. On the planets surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees fahrenheit. While that may be hot enough to melt a chinsy-built little robot, the author makes a valid point that a system of steel gears and levers would be able to withstand such conditions for a long period of time. If we could send a mechanical-built robot down to explore, it might be able to survive on the surface of Venus long enough to collect some of the information we need. Perhaps a machine made out of tungsten, it'd be heavy, but the melting point would be significantly higher.
In conclusion, the author makes many valid points that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers that come with the exploration of the planet. Harder metals with hotter melting points are obviously going to last longer. Even floating 30 or so miles above the surface in a space ship could potentially give us more information than we already have. If we have the resources to make landing and exploring our sister planet possible, why not get all the way on the ground and get as much information as possible though?
| 2
|
The value of using facial action coding is not completely accurate. We can not rely on an computer to analyze our emotions and expression. A computer is able to recognize all fourty four major musces in the face, but what if its off by one. Computers are able to mess up just like how a human can. There are only six basic emtions that technology is able to detect such as happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. But we know that there are variety of emotions and feelings for humans. What if the emotion the computer gives us is not how we feel? In the text it says that humans are able to detect how someone is feeling based off the expression they have on their face. So what is the point in having a computer do it if we can just do it ourselves. Technology is not always accurate in the text the author is stating all of the information we want to hear but he is not telling what could go wrong. We dont know whehter or not the technology is functional for humans to use or if it runs by itself. The world is already letting technology rule our lives we can not alow it to control how we feel and let it share our feelings. Although this type of technology is amusing it has some flaws to it for example if someone was to use this new technology how would they know how to operate it? Even if the computer gave someone the information on how they were feeling how would that be of any benefit to the person.We will soon become lazy and unable to operate our own bodies.In conclusion there is no value in using facial action coding we can not allow technology to run and do everything for us.
| 2
|
Have you ever thought about participating in a seagoing program.
Well Luke Bomberger has. His friend invited him to Europe on a cattle boat.
Luke couldn't say no. Readers should join a seegoing program.
People can have fun have go on lot's of adventures and see lot's of unique places.
Seagoing cowboys get to go to a lot of different and unique places by boat. Luke said he traveled to Europe, China, And he got to see the Acropolis in Greece. In the article he said that the Acropolis in Greece was special.
Luke took a tour of an excavated castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal on is way to China. The author of The Cowboy Who Rode the Waves stated that Luke went to Crete to visit and tour the castle and marveled at the Panama canal on his way to China.
While on his way to China Luke cared for the animals to keep him busy.
The author wrote in the article that Caring for the animals during the crossings kept Luke busy.
Luke fed and watered them at least three times a day. A seagoing Cowboy has to get hay and oats from the bottom deck of the ship and stalls had to be cleaned.
A seagoing Cowboy can have lot's of fun on a boat. They can play baseball, volleyball, and table-tennis when the animals are unloaded from the ship.
They can also play fencing, boxing, read, whittling, and games to pass time.
Participating in the Seagoing Cowoys program can be lot's of fun.
By seeing lot's of unique places and buildings . Maybe Readers and other people will join the Seagoing Cowboys program.
And you can have lot's of fun with games.
While on the booat you can make new friends.
| 2
|
The Face is a natural Martian mesa, like many others. People have wondered if aliens have built it before, but they had no proof. NASA has already proven with evidence it is just a natural land formation.
First, NASA decided to release the pictures of the Face for the public to see, but they only did this to get more people intrested in Mars! To prove that the Face was just a land formation naturaly made, NASA decided to show better quality photos to the public. So they sent out pictures that were ten times sharper to show it was a ROCK formation. Also if there was life on Mars NASA would benifit from it, so i dont see why they would lie.
Next, Mars is a planet with many unknown discoverys but the ones that NASA do figure out the more information we gain for the future. For example in the text it says that Mars has many Martian mesas, so it could be a coinicidence that ONE looks like a face. This doesn't prove there isn't life on Mars but for the information we have at the moment it is doubtful.
Lastly, There are many people in the would who make this stuff up, so why would believe THEIR opinion over NASA who research on space. Don't forget that the only reason they got the information of the Face was because NASA unvieled it. If they had something they didn't want us to know about they would have kept it to themselves.
The Face is just a rock formation. Others might say something like it looks like a human face, or why would it look like a face if the life on Mars hadn't built it. The reason it looks like a face is because the mesa formed that way. It couldn't even have been built by life on Mars because it's over 2 miles wide, so it has to be a land formation.
| 3
|
Prof. Thomas Huang and Nicu Sebe collaborated to innovate a computer software called the "Facial Action Decoding Sytem", which recognizes facial emotions. The software can construct a 3-D model of the face and is programmed to recognize specific traits. Basic emotions such as happiness, surprise, anger, fear, and sadness can all be detected, as well as a mix of them all. This innovation has the potential to be revolutionary if placed in a classroom.
Many emotions are portrayed by students every day, and they can be a key factor in student effort. For example, a tired and bored student is more likely to lose focus and be less attentive than a well-rested and pleased student. The Facial Action Decoding System has the abillity to detect boredom. Dr. Huang stated , "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Then it could modify the lesson like an effective human instructor." He sees the educational benefits to students if his software were used in a classroom. Students would be able to stay focused longer and continue to do so without boredom. A happy student would be much more willing to learn with a software that kept them focused and happy.
With the Facial Action Decoding System in a school, or at home on a PC, everyday computer activities will get more and more interesting. For example, digital advertisements are just about everywhere nowadays, and some of them can be annoying an even disturbing. However Huang's software can process the facial reaction of a user to determine which adds to allow them to see. "For example, if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar as might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different," Huang predicted. Putting a software with the abillity to do this would benefit students and teachers. Ad's can pop up in school that may not be appropriate or have anything to do with a desired subject. If the reaction of the student teaching that subject is negative, the ad will not be seen again. On the other hand, a teacher could find an ad that would benefit a lecture or teaching segment, and more educational ads will appear.
Others claim that the idea of a software that constantly watches a student's face is bizzare. They claim that humans can already detect when something is wrong with a student, or if they arent participating well. While humans can observe a student's emotions, it is not as precise as Huang's software. Given that some may be feeling well but prefer a calm and relaxed demeanor, humans will not know what these students are feeling at the time. However, the software will use all of the facial muscles to determine how these students really feel emotionally.
Huang and Sebe's Facial Action Decoding System truly demonstrates how facial motions can show mental feeling. This is why it would be extremely beneficial to have in schools. Students and teachers would get to experience a fully customized day at school based on their emotions for that day. This will eliminate loss of focus and amplify participation, which is crucial for all student succes.
| 3
|
Dear Senator, I'm writting you a letter because I think that we should change to election by popular vote for the president of the united states than keeping the Electoral College. The reason why I think that we should change to popular voting is because every one will be able to have a say in who becomes president.
With the Electoral College, if you want to vote for a certain president, you are actually voting for electors who are pledged to a certain candidate and would place a vote for the candidate they pledged to to make them president.
The pont is, those electors can be bad people looking for power. Besides, it wouldn't be a fair game if the Electoral College did that. So in order to make it equal, I would like to switch to a popular vote election. But eiither way, a president is still chosen.
"The single best argument against the Electorala College is what we might call the disaster factor. The American people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century; the system allows for much worse. Consider the state legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people.
Back in 1960, segregationists in the Louisiana legislature nearly succceeded in replacing the Democratic electors with new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy. (So that popular vote for Kennedy would not have actually gone to Kennedy.) In the same vein, "faithless" electors ahve occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please. . . Oh, and what if a state sends two slates of electors to Congress? It happened in Hawaii in 1960. Luckily, Vice President Richard Nixon, who was presiding over the Senate, validated only his opponent's electors, but he made sure to do so "without establishinga precedent." What if it happened again?" Excerpt from "The Indefendable Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses are wrong" from Mother Jones By Bradford Plumer.
| 1
|
"Driverless Cars Are Coming" is a great article and makes a lot of great points about this product. My opinion on driverless cars is I think it's a great idea. Also there could be a down side to this product as well.
A public-transportation taxi system that use half the fuel of today's taxis would be a great idea. It would be great for the environment, as well as us as people. This system woul for sure change the world. The Google cars that work independantly have driven half a million miles withough a collision. Which is great because there goes a lot of injured people and totalled cars that people need as transportation. At the same time, these cars still need a human to operate them under certain conditions such as, puling in and out of places, driving through construction places or car accidents. The idea of the cars running on a track is a grea tidea as well, but there is just no time to fix all these roads to make our cars driverless. Also the cost of this would be too expensive. Also if the car could opperate on its own, I would think that the driver would be even more careless than they already are and would pay even less attention. If the car would still need the driver to be alert in case of needing to take over, drivers would just be more tempted to look away and do other things while driving, and then if the car needed the driver to take over they will have already crashed because the driver was distracted by something else. In my opinion driverless cars is a goof idea in some ways, but in other ways they are dangerous. They are nice to have, but only if you are able to be responsible with them. You need to be able to have self dicipline to be able to operate a car like this and stay alert even if the car is driving for you. Anything can happen in a split second. A plus side to them would be if you are someone that works in the city and always has to sit and wait in rush hour, then this would be a good car for you to have. The car would drive for you in this mess, so you wouldn't get so tired of it. But something that I would worry about personally is trusting the car to do it's job. It is a machine, it could malfunction and make a mistake. Like if it doesn't stop when the rest of the traffic does and it rear-ends someone. Or it doesn't go when the rest of the traffic does and someone rear-ends you. It could be dangerous, and the car messing up like that would't be the buyers fault, it is just still something I would worry about as a driver of a driverless car.
The points made in this article are very helpful to understand the progress being made with driverless cars. They would definitely benefit us in the future, and make car pileups a thing of the past.
| 1
|
What do you think about when you think of the future? Do you think that driveless cars would be the end result of being safe? Driveless cars are not safe because it makes people lazy, gets rid of all driving laws, and technology isn't always as great as we think it is.
The world is already lazy, so why would you want to make it more lazy? We already have machines, computers, and phones doing everything for us. Machines make everyday things but people get paid so much for pressing a button. Computers do everything for us. Phones answer all our questions. Now cars are going to be driving themselves. And what are the people going to do? Sit back and watch. Then all we will be doing is having everything do it for us and we do nothing.
Not only will the people be lazy, then there will not be laws like there is today. What is someone gets hurt? Who are you going to blame it on? People do what they do and how they do it for a reason. If people want to drunk drive and drive high then they should be punished for the bad things they do and not have a car doing everything for them and be as if it's a way out of trouble.
Now that there isn't much laws and we have robots doing everything for us there is only one thing we depend on. That is technology. Technology isn't the greatest. Have you ever got mad while being on a computer or a phone? Why is that? It's because technology didn't work as well that day. What are you going to do when you're in a driveless car and it decides to just stop? You're going to get hurt. Now you're hurt and no one is reliable because we thought technology was the greatest thing.
All in all, driveless cars are not safe for today's society. They are not safe because it makes people lazy, laws will be cut in half, and technology doesn't always work. We're here to make something of our lives and not have technology do everything for us. So go out and have a life.
| 2
|
Snowy days equal blurry camera picture's. With the support of that how could you prove it was made by aliens. As you can see when the picture were taken in December. In December at the North it snow's quit often. Which makes it very hard for a good picture.
On a snow day have you every went outside and looked up. Well its very cloudy. Then your trying to tell me that it was a ancient alien civization. Theres no way we could get a clear picture of what it is on a snowy day. Between the camera distance from mars and the snowy day the only way you could prove that there is aliens their is by going to mars, which has never been done.
The only reason you want this to be true is because NASA would get more moeny for the disoveration of the first ancient civization that we have found. Everyday there is new story lines of "ancient civization" saying they have found something like this, but in the end its just a solid rock with no life.
In support snowy days equal blurry camera pictures. This picture is just showing piece of rock that was taken at the right angle at the right time to show a face. Its not about the money its about us knowing the truth, and the truth is its just a boring rock. Anyways wouldnt NASA hide it from us if it really were aliens.
| 1
|
Driverless cars seem new and exciting for technology and safety when it comes to driving. These cars that are talked of have systems put in them that are above genius. I believe that these driverless cars are a great idea and that they should happen.
These driverless cars will have, "a whole lot of sensors" and be a lot safer than a human driver. People can only see so much when driving and with radios and phones as a distraction, safety on the road has plummetted. Having sensors and video cameras "mounted near the rearview mirror" and other places, will allow the car to see what a human driver cannot. Having a "dubbed LIDAR that uses laser beams to form a constantly updating 3-D model of the car's surroundings" is something a human can never do. The car will be fully aware of what is above, below, to the right, to the left, behind and infront of it. It will be able to notice split secoind changes that could help save people from car crashes and bad road conditions.
Some people believe that technology is going to take over and there will be no need for human labor anymore. I do not know if that is true or not, but I do know that these cars can help everyone in one way or another. they may be taking over the place of human drivers, but these cars could allow disabled people to get from one place to another without having the need for someone else to take them. The driverless cars will also help taxi customers, for they will not have to deal with taxi drivers. Taxi drivers are not always the niciest or cleanest people to deal with and they are strangers, but with a driverless car you will not have to worry about any of that.
Driverless cars could also help with traffic. The cars will be able to take care of the speed limit so you will never be behind a slow driver or be constantly worried that your will get pulled over because you accidentally went 3 miles over the speed limit. The ability the cars can have will help safety by letting parents rest assure that their children will be safe while driving. They will not have to worry that they are texting and driving for the car will drive safely for them.
The idea of a driverless car is an amazing one. Their are upgrades to these cars that can help everyone. Whether you are a worried parent worrying about your teenager driving or a disabled person wanting to go somewhere on your own; these cars can help all and are safer than human drivers will ever be.
| 3
|
The object in the picture is not an alien artifact, because land forms on mars that look funny are caused by shadows, the picture quality was not good, and the camera on the last time could of saw buildings and even planes.
The object in the picture was not a alien artifact, because the land on mars has many hills called Martian mesa. A Martian mesa is like a sand dune it is mound of sand and dirt, so for this to be a alien artifact is very unlikely. These mesas are very common on mars, because it says,"Scientists figured it was just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia." This shows that it was just another mound of sand and dirt that had a wierd shadow that made it look like a face.
The second piece of evidence is that, the picture quality was not very clear in the first two pictures. In the first picture they did not have very high HD cameras like they did in 2001. In the first picture it is very blurry and not clear witch gave it the look of a face. In the second picture it was a cloudy day and the picture did not come in clear, still giving it the look of a face. In the last picture it was a perfect day for it and scientest had the camera ready they zoomed it in all the way and where ready for the picture, and when they looked at it it showed nothing but a dirt mound.
The last piece of evidence is that on the last time to the picture could of shown buildings, roads etc. In the last picture the camera scientest where using could of picked up any small buildings, roads, and any that was close to it, but it did not. This means that their is no life on mars to create a mound that looks like a face. Their for their is no alien life on mars.
The evidence shows states that their is no alien life on mars and that it was just a bad picture along with a mound the caused a wierd shadow that caused this look of a face.
| 2
|
Imagine you are a scientist at NASA sicussing the face withsomeone who thinks it was created by alliens. Well we all know that alliens are not real it has been provin many time by other scients. I would unerstand why people would think it was created by these myth cretures, but u also got to think about how land andother things can form tier self in to living fetures like for some exsample. On an sunny day you look outside and u see some clouds and you stare at it for a while. Than all the sudden u see faceses and animals that you reconginize. Like one day I saw a little dolphine in the sky and I got the thinking theirs no wasy their could be a dolphine in the sky. So thats like me saying that thiers a man shaped face on mars tat could have been civilisation on the planet of mars, but dont think wrong i believe that its possabel for people on earth to actual live on that, because theirs other scientists that has proven that to most people and their starting to recrute peopole to actual go to mars. Also their for in the passage it saids it was a huge rock formation like come on now we know a real life humae face is not as huge for it to be spotted from face. Also on mars their is a lot of diffrent shape and sizes and holes like in the moon so its just do univers doing what it does best to form diffrent imagies and diffrent shapes like the was it formed earth and broke diffrent things apart and also land. If u also look in the passage at paragraph 12 it saids in the first sentence that. What the picture actually shows is the martian equivalent of a butte or mesa----LANDFORMS common around the american west. to also make people intrested in the artical the put a. Huge rock formation from mars so theri for their also saying it was made from these mythical cretures called. Alliens and why would alliens want to make a human face in the first pllace if you think about it it actually make sense. For them just to attract people to a new land form that they have found that has a more like humans fetures. So thats why i say that alliens did not make that image or a landform human like image on mars. So thats what i was a scientist at NSAS discussing the face with someone who thinks it was alliens that formed a human like imagie on mars.
| 1
|
There are some advantages and some disadvantages for having and not having a car. U need a car just incase for an emergency and then there is an a advantege for no having a car and that is less pollution in the air.
First I like to talk about the disadvanteges for not having a car. not having a car means more walking or bike riding and then there is always being late to work or being late to something because you do not have a car to drive. people need to have a car because they have to go to work everyday are just to go have fun or go anywhere.
The Second disadvatege for not having a car is when there is an emergency. If there is an emergency hiow are you going to get to the hospital or to the doctors if you dont have a car. Having a car is beteter than not having a car. For an example if a person gets hurt and needs to go to the hospital how are they going to get there if they dont have a car.
The Third the thing I like to to talk about is the advantages for not having a car. Not having a car will help people got more excersice and help them move about around. Not having a car will help with having more money to spend on food or going out with freinds or family.
The Fourth reason why we shouldnt have a car is having less pollution in the air. Also not having a car a will help with the space or room you need Cars can take up alot of space. Cars are also expensive. some people think its bad to have a car because they are expensive. Without cars you will see lots of people walking or running around.
There is advantages and disadvanages for not having a car. Some reasons are good and some reasons are bad.
| 1
|
The author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger by know what kind of planet it is. Numerous factor contribute to Venus's reputation as a challenging planet for human study, despit its proximity to us. Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size. Venus is also the second planet from the sun. Venus has the hottest surface tempaerature of any planet in our solar system. It sometime call the Evening Star.
Next, Venus, Earth, and Mar is the neighbor. the text say," These differneces in speed mean that sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus." No spacecraft has survive no more then a few hour in Venus. They haven't gone in Venus for three deacdes. Venus still has some features that are analogous to those Earth. NASA has one particularly compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus.
Conclusion, deacdes ago they don't have the technology to stay safe in space. Now they have all type of technology to go to Venus. They should make them wear something that could cool them off. Some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of VEnus's surface. They should sent two people to check out Venus because they could help each other.
| 1
|
Would you buy a driverless car? The negative aspect in driving driverless cars is that they need lots of senors, they cant help get througth road work or traffic and the technology can fail.
Manufactures are starting to use smart cars. Smart cars that are considered driveless. Theses smart cars needs lots of sensors that makes then able to drive without the company of humans. Google has made a driverless car that has senors on the wheels of the car and on the roof of the car. Even though senors have been around since the 1980's and have advanced since then, the senors that are on the brakes of the car can reduce the power in your engine.the senors reduce the engine because it takes a lot of power on your car. you need the power you can get from your engine just in case you're in a bad sitution. Not only driveless cars need lots of senors they arent able to help through nagativing through road work and heavy traffic.
Driveless cars arent really driverless when you think about it. Driverless cars need the assitanants of humans to pull out of a driveway. They also need help with heavy traffic issues. Driverless cars can not go through roadwork areas without humans navating them through it. Driverless cars arent that much help when it comes to things it should know how to do.Whats the point of having a driverless car if it cant help you through traffic and others thing pretaining to driving? Not only they cant help youin traffic or road work , What if the technology fails?
In the article the authour talks about how the technology can fail.
In traffic laws it says nothing about how if your computer in your fails during a crash, it talks about how the driver iss responisble for the car and not being able to control it. In the article it says ," Traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times. In some states driverless cars are already considered illegal for that reason. Who would be responsible if theres a crash , the driver or the manufacture? Its better to limit the use of driverless cars because cars who be more safe in the control of a human driver.
Its better not to have driverless cars. It will much safer for people to not have driverless cars because it would most likely have a high number of car crashes and injured people if a car didnt have an actul driver behide the wheel.
| 3
|
In 1976, Scientists made a discovery on Cydonia,a region on the Red Planet. NASA's Viking 1 was snapping photos of the area, looking for sites for its sister ship, Viking 2. While it began to take pictures of the region, it spotted a human-like face. Many believe it's an alien monument, many believe it's a natural landform.
It has been proven that the Face is a natural landform, but not everyone seems to agree. What the picture actually shows is the Martian equilvalent of a buttle or mesa, which are common landforms around the American West. Also, there are no scientific facts that aliens are real. Conspiracy theories lack credability. They question NASA, and conpiracy theorists believe that NASA is trying to hide something from them. Meanwhile, defenders of the NASA budget with there was an ancient civilization on Mars. They photographed the Face as soon as they could get a good shot at it. On April 5,1998, Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time. Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera snapped a picture ten times shaper than the Viking photos. There was no alien monument, only a natural landform. Finally, they gave up.
After eighteen long years of investigation, many researchers gave up on the Face. Many natural landforms disappear over time which is why scientists and researchers can no longer find it. Although, some researchers are still on the look out for the Face, hoping to find it again soon.
| 2
|
In a world of advancing technology finding new ways to change everyday objects is becoming a trend. From improving smartphones to driverless cars the number of new innovations is limitless. Driverlss cars is one thing that has really been advancing lately. Automobile manufacturers are coming up with new ways to advance the car. New "diverless" features are starting to become the new trend in the automobile world.
Driverless cars are a good yet bad idea. There are many great features that are being developed in these cars, but its not the smartest/safest idea. Allowing technology to control a car instead of a human can lead to many hazards. One thing that it can lead to is wrecks that happen out of the persons control. The technology could fail and cause the car to do things that it should not. Cars that are run by technology also don't have the instincts that a human has. People have the ability to prdict the acts of another driver, like when they pull out in front of you. Technology may not be able to detect these types of things leading to more accidents. Driverless cars would also take away the need for people to learn how to drive. When a teen becomes of age to drive they wouldn't need to learn how since the car does it all for them. What would happen if the technology were to fail and needed to be manually driven? People wouldn't know how to opperate the car because it was all done for them. In the event of an accident or speeding who would be put at blame? The driver or the car? These types of things could lead to many disbutes about the cars themselves.
Although there are many down sides to a driverless car, many good things could come out it as well. All of the sensors on a driverless car could help in the evnt of a person not paying attention while driving. The sensors could make the car react according to the situation if the person controlling the car was not paying attention. If a drunk driver were to be operating the car the technology in the car could help save the drunk driver, and other drivers on the road from getting in an accident.
Driverless cars have good and bad points. It is a grat idea with great intentions, but not all intentions are good ones. These cars could help save people from accidents or it could lead to more. The ability of what these cars can do won't really be known until they are applied to the real world.
| 2
|
Elisabeth Rosenthal once asked, "Has America passed peak driving?", (30) having people go out of their way to think about the inquirable question. There are plenty of advantages of limiting car usage. America, nor any other country on this planet, really need cars. Sure, cars help us to get to a location faster than walking or biking. But it also smogs up the environment we live in and creates a stressful tension within you.
In Source 2, Paris, one of the world's most famous sightseeing locations on this planet, was days of near-record pollution. Paris strictly enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. (10) For almost a week, there was an intensified amount of smog roaming the streets of Paris. Congestion was down 60% in the capital of France. (14) This smog was causing frigid nights and warm days the warmer layer of air to trap car emissions. (15) Not only was there smog in Paris, but also rivaled one of the most polluted cities in the world, Beijing, China. Paris decided to particially cut down motorists chances of driving and leave their cars at home or would have had to suffer a fine. This well-known city was car-free for almost an entire week.
In line with Source 2, Source 3 explains multiple ways of transportation. Why drive cars and pollute the air, if there are plenty of other ways to getting to your destination. Bogota, Colombia has set up a program that is set to spread to other countries. This program consist of having a car-free day once a year for the last 3 years, Day Without Cars day. More than 6 million of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses and taxis to work, Bogota's streets were traffic-jam-free.(20) "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," said Carlos Arturo Plaza, a businessman. (24) No stress was within the city of Bogota that day. Their goal is to promote better transportation and reduce smog. (21)
Enrique Riera, the mayor of Asunción, Paraguay, noticed the enthusiastic changes being made and said, "These people are generating a revolutionary change, and this is crossing borders." (26) Fellow citizens, their are several advantages of limiting car usage. Maybe the next time you think about going somwhere, try taking a bike or walking. It's easier and reliefs stress among yourself. Plus, when not driving a car, you're able to decrease the amount of pollution being put into the air.
| 2
|
In the passage "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" explains why the exploration of Venus is a worthy pursuit even though there are dangers. As stated in the article Venus which is reffered to as Earth's "Twin" would be most suitable for life on another planet. There are risks of taking the exploration to Venus such as a successful landing and and harsh tempatures, but if you look at the upside of potential life on a new planet the pros out weigh the cons on the oppurtunity to explore Venus.
The author supports the idea of exploring Venus for potential life by explaining how Venus is the "Most Earth-like in our solor system." Signs of water on Venyss from long ago could have supported many forms of life on Venus. The passage also says "Today, Veneus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth." which shows the simililarities to the planets. Which also ties into how Venus is the closest planet to Earth with the features it has.
The other side to why we should continue our exploration on to Venus is because we have the technology in today's world that is advanced enough to get to Venus. NASA has shown they have the technology to last on the surface of the earth for 3 weeks which is a great start to exploring the surface of the planet. NASA also came up with the idea of "Allowing scientist who go to Venus to float above the fray." which means the scientist would be in Venus but they wouldn't be on the surface. That would allow the scientists to get a a bird's eye view of what Venus is like.
With strong evidence like how closely Venus is related to Earth and the technology we have on Earth to get us to Venus the author is able to make a good arguement and support the exploration of Venus. The Pros such as a new potential of life, and the exploration of a new planet out weigh the cons which are cost and, the danger of landing on Venus.
Therefore the support the author used, makes the exploration of Venus a claim that has evidence behind it to support his idea.
| 1
|
Luke helped innocent people and now other people should to. Helping isn't just being nice. It is also about caring sharing and giving. Not disrespect, mistreat, and ignore.
All people deserve the same right. luke got injured and he had to rest for a couple days but he stil went on to finish the mission. He didn't even have an idea that his life was gonna change he just took the chance when it was offered and he never doubted it.
After the war he joined the UNRRA(the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration).Luke was only 18 when all of this happened. He helped out at his aunt Katie's ranch for most of his days when he was just a little boy. He helped with the enviorment and cattle and other animals at the places where ww2 took place. Alot of people died but not in his hands.
Brave people survived and never forgot the memory of ww2. Luke being a Seagoing cowboy was the thing that he was most proud of. It opened up everything and everywhere to him that made him feel awesome for helping out arround the world instead of just watching other people take his opportunity.
| 0
|
Joining the Seagoing Cowboys Program is one big honor, and a very tough one. It can be fun and exciting to! There can be serious times, this is a job for saving people and animals so in these times you have to be focsed. There are also times that are just incredible, in your spare time you can go sight seeing.
I, myself went to China and Eruope. Though that wasn't all, for me I thought going to Arcopolis in Greece was awesome. So was taking a trip to a gondola ride in Vinice, Italy, which is a city with streets of water, it was amazing! I also went to a castle in Crete and the Panama Canal on my way to China.
Joining the Seagoing Cowboys Program can also be a bucket full of fun!
Especially when were on our return trips after the animals have been unloaded. We (The cowboys) played a bunch of fun games that keeped us ocupied and having fun! We played some of our sports were there was empty hold were the animals had been housed. In those places we played sports such as baseball and vollyball. We also played Table-Tennis tournaments, boxing , fencing , and whittling. Reading was another thing to do to pass the time, but not as fun as the sports!
Joining this place will give you a lot of memorise to remember, such as saving animals or even people. You will have memorise of fun times or the sad. Or times you've fallen, or the times you've fallen and gotten up. It doesn't matter what kind of memorise they are, you will never forget them.
I know I will never forget the memorise that I have made here they are truly unforgetable. If you join you will make a differnce and one you will never forget. So I recomend you to sign up, to make a differnce in the word and to help the people and animals in need. We always have space for new recuits, so sign up today! One thing that I can asure you is that you won't regret it, I promise. So What are you waiting for? Hurry up and make a differnce!
| 2
|
In the mid 70s, NASA discovered a massive face on the planet Mars, they photographed it. It resembled eyes,a nose and a mouth. NASA leaked the photo, then people, including scientist and astronomers,started to wonder if it were created by aliens!
I disagree,I do not think the face was created by aliens, and there are various reasaons. I do not think the face was created by aliens and I am going to explain why,a face can`t be created by aliens unless it were remains,scientist would have already discovered aliens before the face if it were to be created by aliens, and NASA revealed the face as 2 miles long,it couldn`t be created by aliens.
The face on Mars couldn`t have been created by aliens,how can a face be created by aliens, unless it were alien remains? If it were alien remains,that means aliens would have to exist. Scientist have not found aliens or alien remains to this day. A sharper picture of the face proved it wasn`t created by aliens, mentioned in paragraph 7. Besides, aliens can`t create a face.
If it were to be created by aliens we would have discovered aliens before we found this huge face. Space rovers have been searching the planet mars before the face was found. The face is two miles long according to paragraph one,it would take some time to build it. We would have found aliens building it before we found the face itself. Thus, the face is a natural landform.
The face is two miles long, if it were aliens existing, they would not be able to build something like this. An alien wouldn`t create a two mile landform if it exsited. It would not be a reason to, there would be no benificiary reason for an alien to build a face. It was also discovered as a natural landform. It couldn`t possibly be created by aliens.
In conclusion, I do not think the two mile landform was created by aliens. The only way it would be alien related is if it were alien remains. If it were created by aliens, we would have discovered them already. Since the landform is two miles long,it would take some time if it were to be build. Besides,it`s two miles long, there is no benificiary reason for an alien to spend this much time on a landform, it couldn`t possibly be created by aliens. This is why I dont believe that the face on Mars, was created by aliens.
| 2
|
Does anyone remeber when Google came up with the smart glasses that can do anything? It was said to be the next revolutionary smart item and everyone will either want it, or have it. Well, as it turns out, not even half of America bought these state-of-the-art glasses. Just as the Google glasses did not succeed, I believe the same thing will happen to driveless cars. Not only will they be extremely expensive to manufacture and buy, but they are also completely unecessary. There are already smart phones that can read fingerprints and buy anything just with a press of a button--correction: the press of a screen. Also, the cars can even possibly be labeled as unsafe. Anyone could go anywhere because there is no specific driver; nobody is in control. Children could drive off to anywhere they pleased if they felt like doing so. Also, as stated in the passage, who will pay for damages and possible hospital bills if there are accidents? It couldn't be the driver's fault, because they weren't even controlling the car. It couldn't be the manufacturers fault, because the car worked perfectly for testing, right? Driveless cars may be fascinating, but they are not a good idea for an improved way of driving.
First of all, these vehicles will be extremely expensive. The United States is already trillions of dollars in debt due to many wars and payments, and yet we still keep spending billions of dollars that we do not have. Not only will the cars cost a lot of money to make, but having to remake every single road so that these smart cars can drive on them will cost even more. The amount of construction workers that would have to be paid would shoot numbers through the roof! Exactly how much would these cars even cost? Guaranteed, the cost of buying these cars will not be equivalent to the average Toyota Camry or Honda Civic. The car may use half the fuel needed for regular cars, but they will cost a lot more than gas.
Secondly, these cars are not necessary. They are new! They are exciting! They are the most ridiculous idea to have been considered. So many machines do the work for people and this can result in a fat America. The United States has already been depicted as the most unhealthy country. If these cars can drive themselves, anyone could go anywhere without a driver. If this is correct, then it is possible for a child to possibly drive to the next state if they felt like it. Criminals wouldn't need a getwaway driver if all they had to do is hop in the car and press a button. This is an unsafe possibility. Although the driverless car may seem fun for people who want a new way to be transported, it is completely unecessary and lazy.
Finally, the idea of driverless cars may contradict with the law. As stated in the article, there may be some conflict between manufacturers and consumers when it comes to accidents and road problems. If there was an accident between two smart cars, who would pay for the damage? It is difficult to point fingers when both cars are driverless and are not controlled by a person. Will the manufacturers have a warranty for the car? Will each driver have to pay for damages themselves as if they just broke a cell phone? Does a separate insurance come with the car? These are questions that need to be answered if manufactureres want their ideas to sell.
In conclusion, driverless cars are not a good idea because they cost money that is not there, they are unecessary and may even be dubbed as unsafe, and the idea contradicts with many laws in different states. Just as the Google glasses was a bit too much, the driverless cars would meet the same unfortunate fate.
| 4
|
Driveless cars have been a fantasy on television and in media, but in many ways, they have evolved into what could be a distant reality. As the author states, Google has been working on driveless cars since 2009. For cars that drove half a million miles without crashing, it is a remarkable step into what could be a possible evolution for cars. There might be questions and concerns on safety, but there is much thought put behind such measures.
For cars to drive on their own efficently, sensors must be put into place for the driveless car to imitate a human driver. The article states that over the past years, sensors have improved to respond to dangerous, out-of-control situations. As advancements head way, sensors on cars are becoming even more reliable and safe.
Even if a car could drive itself, applications and abilities such as texting can be turned off for even more safety reasons, according to manufacturers. Such as laws against texting while driving were made, laws will need to be put in place to ensure the safety of people. In this moment and time, cars are safer in the control of humans; to avoid confict with manufacturers and drivers, driveless cars are still not available for the public. But technology still continues to improve. So much so, Tesla is presenting a 2016 model that can drive by itself for ninety percent of the drive. Other companies such as Audi, Mercedes-Benz, and Nissan plan on producing driveless cars in the close future. Cars that drive themselves may seem hazardous, but in the distant future they will be able to eventually become safe.
Driveless cars are becoming a reality for many technology companies and are plausable for an innnovative way of transportation. There are many safety concerns, but as they are being kept in check, fear of mistakes should fall. There are many steps that go into the car for safety measures, such as sensors. Though they are still in the making, driveless cars are an exciting and plausable mode of transportation that will change the world forever.
| 3
|
In ths artile "Driverless Cars Are Coming" they talk about how cars can drive on their own. Although, it talks about how the driver still has to stay catious. If drivers still have to be catious and take control when theres road construction and what not, then what's the point in having a drivless car. To me it's just having like to drive yourself just without pushing the brake or gas. You still have to keep your hands on the wheel.
I just dont feel that drivless cars are safe. I'd rather have to drive my own car then to have the car doing all the work because then again it says in the article that you still have to be aware of where your going and if there is any road construction, also you have to have your hands on the steering wheel just for it to activate the sensors. My question is, lets say I live in a place where there is bad weather, of course the huge trucks are going to come clean the snow, but sometimes pot holes form into the street. So do the driveless cars go aorund them or do we have to be catious too, and even if the car does go around the pot holes, how does it know not to hit the car next to them, or to go on the grass, or even the side walk.
Some people get motion sickness when they are in a car. As an example, someone I know gets motion sickness if they sit in the passanger seat of the car, but are fine if they are driving and handling the car. What if a person gets sick everytime they go into the driveless car because technically they aren't driving it. In the articale it stated "The car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel", in concern, what if a driver lost an arm and isn't capable of holding both hands on the steering wheel for the sensors and is used to driving with one hand.
All these concerns have to be thought while processing these cars. Drivless cars to me just aren't the new thing and a lot of more accidents are going to happen. Not a lot people read the manuals, they just buy the car and drive it. How are they going to know they have to navigate through work zones or around accidents? Why would there be accidents if we relied on a driveless car to take care of our driving for us? Drivless cars seem cool and interesting but when you start to realize the facts into this it's not so great after all.
| 2
|
In this story about "Making Mona Lisa Smile" They talked about alot. In the first two paragraphs they talked about Face Expressions. Dr. Huag and his colleague are experts at developing better ways for humans and computers to communicate. They can caculate Emotions like a math homework. How can a computer recognize subtile facial movements we humans use to Express ourselves.
Then it gets into Facial Expressions that could be recognized. In this paragraph it said "you can probably tell how a friend is feeeling simply by the look on their face". Some people havr a natural mean look and some have no expression. Dr. Huag predicts that a calssroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming bored or confused. He says the same technology can make computer amimated faces more expressive live video games, video surgery.
While looking in the mirror they give instrctions on how to make a smile. 1. Raise your lips at the corners of your mouth. 2. Then squint your eyes slightly, they will like like crows feet at the corner of your eye. 3. Hold all of that and then raise the outer parts of your cheeks up towards your eye. Does your expression in the mirror suggest an emotion?
A Facial Feedback tells the person emotions. You could make a smilling face but are you really happy? Moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions but help produce them. People actually practice smiling and frowning on stage for them to create emotions. Whoevere would oof knew that making faces would reveal sos much about the science of emotions.
My conclusion of this that i never knew computers could caculate your expression. I could look and tell something is wrong with him or her by their facail expression. I could here their emotions through their voice not their face too much. You couldn't do this back then about 20-50 years ago because we didnt have thi much of technology. Now that we do its so much you can do with it.
| 0
|
A car that you do not have to drive. It sounds pretty cool right? There are many aspects on why driverless cars are good, but on the contrast side, many driverless cars are not that appealing, not to mention that they would be highly expensive. Driverless cars can cause accidents, are not truly "driverless', and are not legal in numerous states.
Driverless cars, even though they sound interesting, are in fact not that ethical. When you think of a driverless car you may think that they are safer, when in fact they are not. According to the article, they still have many kinks to work out, and big problems with liability.Cars that are driverless can cause as many accidents as a normal car can. If you were to get into an accident wtih a car that is driverless, and it was the techonolgys fault, who is to blame?
When you think of the word "Driverless car" you would think that the automobile itself would be completely hands free, when in fact it is not. The article states that the driverless car can not do what a human can do. Such as go through heavy traffic, or going through work zones and around accidents. In fact, the article also states, that none of the cars developed so far are completely driverless. The driverless cars are not in fact driverless yet.
If car manufaturer was to think of a way to build a driverless car with all of the features it takes to make it a driverless car, he wouldnt be able to unless he lived in one of the following four states in the U.S. In the Unites States, according to the article, only have four states that allow you to test and make driverless cars. These states are: California, Nevada, Florida, and District of Columbia.
With limited states that allow you to test drive these types of automobiles, how do we know that they are truly safe?
On the contrast side the driverless car is a good saftey feature. It drives itself, but alerts the human when an action they can not do arises. Since these cars have this feature, they can alert the driver when they really need to pay attention. When you are driving the driverless car you always have to have your hands on the wheel or else it alerts you, which is a good saftey feature.
Driverless cars have many keen features, and soon this will be the car everyone wants to buy in the future. But with all the saftey features only the higher class members would be able to afford it. Also, cars that are driverless could pose a threat to the newer generation by letting them slack off, and let the car drive itself. When in reality you are supposed to be driving the car. The question is, would you allow your teen to drive this car, even though the technology is not promised to work?
| 3
|
Cars are one of the most important reason why global warming exists and there will be alot of more benefits if thye limited the car usage. Global warming is affecting everyone and is getting worst every single day and we have to do something now before is to late. Cars in cities like Los Angeles they are a problem becuase they are alot more cars then people. Citizens should limit the usage of cars because people will survive without cars and driving causes pollution to Earth.
Germany uses suburb to reduce the car usage and make more people walk or use bicycles to go where they want to go. Vauban's streets are completely car free except the main thoroughfare, where the tram to downtown Freibrug runs, and a few streets on one edge of the community. As a result, 70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold a car to move here. I'm much happier this way, said Heidrum walter, as she walked verdant streets. Vauban, completed in 2006, is an example of a growing trend in Europe, the United States and elsewhere to separate suburban life from auto use. Passengers cars ar e responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe and up to 50 percent in some car intensive areas in the United States. In the Unite States, the Environmental Protection Agency is promoting car reduced communities, and legislators are starting to act. People can do just as good without cars.
Paris bans car drivers due to the smog an pollution that the cars cause. On monday motorists with even numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22 euro fine ($31). THe same would apply to odd numbered plates the following day. Almost 4,000 drivers were fined and 27 people had their cars impouded for their reaction to the fine. Congestion wasa down 60 percent in the capital of france, after five days of intensifying smog. The smog cleared enough Monday for ruling French party to rescind the ban for odd numbered plates on tuesday. President Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States greenhouse gas emissions, recent studies suggest thta Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as year goe by.
In conclusion, people can live their normal life without cars and this will help the ecosystem that is getting affected every single day. Alot of places are banning cars to help reduce the green house problem. Government should build more car free communities because citizens like the idea and its helping Earth. Citizens should limit the car usage to help the Earth.
| 2
|
The Face on Mars is just a natural landform. This is not a face created by aliens. The picture taking in 1998 revealed it was a natural landform, if NASA would have said it was aliens they would recieve more funding, however they said it was an illusion of a face, and in 2001 the picture taken clearly shows that it is a natural landform.
In 1998 NASA captured a pictue of the face as soon as they could get a good shot at it. The picture revealed that it was just a natural landform, just like NASA had said in 1976. Also, when the original picture was taken in 1976 it was revealed to be an illusion of a face by NASA. If NASA chose to call the landform work done by aliens, they would recieve more funding. However, NASA was very truthful in there fundings and they didn't have any reason besides the truth to say it was a natural landform. Finally, the clearest pictue of it taken in 2001 clearly shows a natural landform that couldn't be mistaken for anything else. A quote from the article is,"Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters compared to the 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo. 'As a rule of thumb, you can dicern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size,' he added, 'So, if there where objects in this picture like airplanes... or Egyptian-style pyramids... you could see what they were!'" This quote proves that the best picture ever taken so far of the Face clearly shows that it is a natural thing. The natural landform could not be mistaken as anything else in the pictures we have.
It is clear that the Face is a natural landform because the picture in 1998 revealed it, NASA comfired it was a natural thing which caused them to not get extra funding, and the picture taken in 2001 is the clearest one we have and it is very obvious that it is a natural landform. These reason show how the Face is a natural landform and not an alien made thing.
| 2
|
Have you ever wondered what it would be like if humans didn't have to control the car? I think driveless cars is a good idea but at some time humans will have to take over. I say this because it would be less acidents, there will be less tickets , and people without lisences can't drive.
One reason why I think it's a good idea is because it will be less acidents. The computer will know what to do in different situations. And i think they should have a monitor on when the computer drives and when the person drives. At what place and what time. Then you will know who to blame for any acidents.
Another reason why i think it's a good idea is because there will be less tickets. If the car knows what speed limit to go or when to stop then there would be no problem with running past lights and stop signs. And you can't lie about it was the computer because it follows the rules , and they have it monitered on the car.
My last reason is because there is a lot of people out there that doesn't have a lisents and they are still driving. If you have to show your lisents or put it into somewhere so the computer knows you are allowed to drive than there wouldn't be a problem.
There are so many good reasons why you should have drivless cars. But theses are my 3 reasons why i think we should have them.
| 2
|
In the article The Challenge of Exploring Venus the Author seems to have strong feelings about wanting to visit Venus. In the article is says venus has some bad things if you go there. Venus is Earth's twin as it says in the article it's the closest in size, density and distnce too, because venus is right around the corner many people have sent a good amount of spacecraft to land on Venus. None of the Spacecrafts was able to survive. Venus is very hard to get to because spacecrafts didn't make it and neither will people. Venus is 170 degrees they can average over 800 degrees. Venus is a very hot Planet.
The NASA has one particular idea to send humans to study Venus. Venus would allow scientist to float above the fray. Solar power would be plentiful and radiation would not exceed earth's level Not easy conditions but the people who go to Venus would be able to survive. The Author seems to know a lot about Venus and how much he wants to be able to know or see more about it.
The Author will more than likely look more into this and see if visiting Venus is possible and if it is he will more than likely go and write more and tell people what he expierenced and what it looked like. The Author talked a lot about Venus and how much he wanted to see what it looks like and if you could survive on it he definitly know what he is talking about and knows a lot of Pro's and Con's about it and will learn more. I agree with the Author I think visiting Venus could be possible if they did some more research about making sure the humans would be okay and safe and be able to go back to earth safe and sound when they can Visiting Venus would be great.
| 1
|
It would be awsome to identify human emotions,and knowing what students feel in class can be really useful.
I think the new technology that reads emotional expressions of people can be useful in schools. The teachers will be able to know when the students are bored, in the article it said "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." it let's the teacher know by the students emotions that the lesson is boring or the lesson is not understandable for them. The new technology can help teachers make their plan lessons more fun and understandable and if the schools of all around the world uses the new technology it would be lot easier for the teachers to make the students be more focus on school and the lesson, but not only the technology can help schools it can also help people with their business, but that's not the point the point is that school's should start using the new the technology to help students stay in school and helped them to stay focus. But not only it helps during class time it can also help outside of school like if the student's play sports the coches can know when the student is sad, tired, happy,or angry. So I think having the new technology in school can be really helpful and useful for everyone but most likely the teacher's.
| 2
|
The Leonardo da Vinci's painting was his bigges painting in thw world he made a 83 percent happy will 9 percent disgusted and 6 were percent fearful and only 2 were angry. The Mona Lisa demonstrantion bring a smile to your face when you see it whit your one eyes and it show you how computer can do just imagine a computer that knows if you were happy all the time or if you were sad. The painting Vinci did was only one of the thing he did he mad more thing in the pass but the whole world knowes him for this one pating he ,ad and everyone from king to people like me and you come and see it Leonardo da Vinci will be the best man in the world for making this at his time the detels he put in to this and the paint he put in to was one of the best thing he could of done.
| 0
|
Choosing weather we should keep the electorial college or start voting by popular vote well some may say its a tough choice and others may say that its an easy one. But after awhile and you take some time to think about it, you come to your sences and see that well maybe it is a simple question. The question is does the electorial college work? the electorial college does not work because people dont always know what they're voting for, also they might not even be really taking our votes,finally they are also unfair to the voters.
To begin, the electorial college isnt good for the people because they dont always know what there voting for for example. In the second article it states that
"sometimes voters get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong candidate".
Now that's a problem dont you think! most voters just go with the flow and pick who they're friends pick or they just go out and choose the first person they think is good, And because of that people dont really care about who they pick, Which is a bad thing because they might choose someone who wants to kill off half of the human race. Every one should know who they are voting for and why there voting for that person, because if not then they should just use the popular vote process.
Furthermore, we should use the popular vote process becasuse who really knows what there doing with our votes they could be throwing them away and not taking our votes. behind closed doors they could just be choosing who they want to become president. statistics show that out of 100 people 80 voted and the other 20% didn't vote at all so why does the talley say that 90% voted in the state of oklahoma when only 80% voted. now think about it they use all these out rageous numbers trying to make the person but only come to find out they're just adding on numbers making whoever they want to become president. Many people dont pay attention to the talleys and results but if you put it all together then you would see what im saying. and yes, many people would say that the electorial college is great and that they arnt doing anything fishy well if you think about if and understand the voters and see how many dont vote and how many do vote you would also see that something isnt right with these numbers. But onthe other hand if you had used the popular vote process no one would have these problems.
Finally,the electorial college is unfair to voters,in the second story it states that
"the best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality.
and the arguments against direct elections are spurious at best".
mostly voters should have the right to know and undrstand everything that goes on while there voting they should be aware of the candidates all of the people behind the candidates such as the extra democratics and republicans that stands behind that certain candidate. never the less I believe thatthe popular vote process is a great idea and that we should stand as one ans abolish the electorial college.
In Conclusion, the electorial college isnt good and we shopuld abolish then and replace it with the popular vote process nothings better than knowing who your voting for and why. But really think about it does the electorial college really work?
| 2
|
As Luke says you can take many great expeditions, and it made him more aware of people and their needs. Luke had just turned 18 and that meant he could be drafted into war. But he was on a cattle boat so he could keep doing service there.
By the time of 1947 he was discharged, Luke had taken nine trips! That's a record for any Seagoing Cowboy. A big reason that you should join it (as Luke recalls), is because you get to help people in need. And get to lean more about there country. In the story Luke says that he got to see the Panama Canal. Wouldn't that be amazing?
Luke felt that it would be a chance of a lifetime to go and be a Seagoing Cowboy, and he just couldn't say "no" to Don. In 1945 WWII ended and many countries were left in ruins. So Don and Luke signed up to help. They helped for about two years before they were released.
He says that he also has much fun on board as well, especially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded. They played games of tennis and volley ball where the animals once were. You'd have much fun on board and on trips.
Those are just a few examples of why you should want to be a "Seagoing Cowboy". As Luke says it is much more than an adventure. It opened the world up to him and is grateful for the oppertunity that he had. There is so much more to learn about as well but if I were to try to explain it all I would need a lot more space.
| 2
|
in german suburbs residents are pioneers and they have given up thier cars to stop all the busy crowded parking. even though owning a car is aloud they still dont do it because it is safer for the children and enviroment . they are also trying to put a message put to the world . more than 70 percent of the vaubans famileis do not have cars .
the cars in europe cause a fair percentage of the greenn house gases . passanger cars alone cause 12 perecent of the gases alone . and up to 50 perecent in some car-instensive places in the us . it is better for the inviroment for there tho be less gas emmisions .
in some places such as paris there is so much gasx emisionds that they have banned all driving . the reason being is there is so much smog from vehicals its not healthy to live in or nothing .
In bogota columbia there is a all day car free day . this means the goal for everyone is to do not use a motorized vehicle all day and violtors will be fined 25 dollor fines if they us a vehicles . the hope for that program is to go world wide or to atleast spread to more coumtries.
What the goal is for this passage is to get everyone to go without cars and just use bicycles or walk or somthing along those lines.
| 1
|
The nasa is woirking on other approaches to studyng venus, for example some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venu's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions. Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth.
A thick atmostphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in venu's atmostphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmostpheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet.
This is a challenge about Explring Venus. Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of destiny and size, and occasionally the closestin distance to. The national Aeronauticsand space Administration (NASA) has one particularly compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. They want to learn about Venus, and Mars.
| 0
|
Many people think that aliens are real, but they're not! Many people believe that this photo is caused by aliens. They don't know the true story of this and that it has to be caused by natural landform. There's no proof that aliens are real and no one really proved it at all! People just assume that it's caused by aliens because they see a big hole, but it's natural landform. Until I see proof that aliens are real then I will believe them, but right now there is no proof at all.
Many people think that it's caused by aliens, but it's not. It even said, "NASA unveiled the image for all to see. The caption noted a "huge rock formation." It may look like a face, but that's just how it is. Conspiracy theorists don't even know what they're talking about. They just assume things, but they never show proof. NASA even showed proof that it's not caused by alien, but it may look like it was caused by aliens. It's just a natural landform.
Many people waited to see if the natural landform was actually caused by aliens. JPL revealed that it was a natural landform and that there was no alien monument after all. Many people still believe that it's caused by aliens and people even showed proof that it's not caused by aliens. Not everyone was satisfied that it was a natural landform because, "The camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the face." There really hasn't been a single one proof that aliens actually exist.
Although, the natural landform does look like an alien, but that's just how the natural landform is. The picture was actually showing us a butte or mesa, which is a landform that is common around the American West. So, this is common here, in the Earth, so this has to be common in Mars. They even said, "That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars." So, it was provened to be a mesa.
Many people thought that this picture was to be an alien. Many people, including NASA, even showed proof that it wasn't an alien. NASA at first did think that it was an alien, until they showed us proof of what they researched. People even showed us proof that it was just mesa, which is common to happen. It may look like it was caused by an alien, but it was just a natural landform that looks like an alien.
| 2
|
You shoud joi the sea going cow boys because it is an adventure.It is fun.You get to help people gather suplys shelter
and you get to help aor country get a better veiw on what we with do forv them and that we will not let them down and that we care about that country and that is a good thing and that if they think that we may have some countrys. helping us when a war destoys our coutry.It is always a good thing to help other country like our country that is also a good thing to
do
for them that is that is why you should join them because we are a helpful country we have the fredom of speech the fredom to tell the truth and thev fredom to tell the truth the fredom to do what we want to do and say what we want to say.We have a free country this is one of the best countrys to be at but we are the poorest country in the wourld because of the goverment and we could get it up if we start to make the cost on everthing more but cofee and candy and toys but that is a nother topic and if i could i would talk about it .
| 0
|
The so-called "Face on Mars" is not what its famous title implies. If it's name was to be re-done to be politically correct, it would be renamed "The Mesa on Mars." The landform would be renamed that because it is a mesa, if there was life on Mars we'd know, and because the only reason we ever called it a face was because of poor camera quality in 1976.
In many Western countries, there are landforms called Mesas. They're quite amazing, and a few probably do look like faces up in space. But do people believe that aliens created them? Why, no! Mars is alike to Earth in ways, so it makes sense for it to have some of the same landforms that we do.
If there even was alien life on Mars, the public would know about it. Just like they found out about the "the Face on Mars". It would get NASA publicity and money, so they'd tell the world about their findings. So if the face really was created by aliens, NASA would tell us. But they know its not, so they won't tell us otherwise.
At first in 1976, the mesa did look like a face. Most of that is due to the shadows that were cast at the time and the quality of the camera. It wasn't the best. But, cameras kept evolving and NASA eventually went back in for better pictures. Once they did, though, it did not resemble a face as much.
In conclusion, "the Face on Mars" is actually a mesa. Science and good camera quality has proved it. And if that's not convincing enough, it is a mesa just like we have in the U.S.,
NASA would be the first to let anyone know if there was life on Mars, and because it only ever looked like a face due to bad camera quality. Now, there is not as much mystery to "the Face on Mars", and it may not be as much as an adventure, but NASA
can add it into the books of what we have learned about our universe.
| 2
|
The author suggests that studying Venus is important for a few reasons. The first of which is that Venus is one of the most Earth like planets in our solar system. The second one is Venus could have once been able to be compatable for life. Another thing that the author brings up is that Venus has powerful earthquakes and frequent lightning strikes. The final reason is that the author brings up the challenges that NASA is facing in trying to get to Venus. What the author is getting to is that when we finally figure out how to get to Venus this could help us get to other planets as well. That is why I think that the author wants us to study Venus.
The first of which that the author brings up is the fact that Venus is the most Earth like planet in our solar system. Venus has a rocky surface similar to that of Earth's. It also has valleys, mountain, and craters all of this is similar to that of Earth's and can be used to maybe help us more understand out planet. Another thing that the author brings up is that Venus is similar to Earth is that scientist believe that Venus was once covered largely with oceans. This means that their could have been life on Venus such as plants. Another thing that was brought up was in paragraph three where the author talked about how Venus has powerful earthquakes and frequent lightning strikes this is something that we also share with that is also happening here on Earth. If we could go to Venus and study all of that it could help us understand how to know farther ahead of time when we may have a a earthquake. The final thing that the author talks about is all of the challenges that we will face trying to get humans on the ground on Venus. The troubles that we face is the atmosphere and the pressure. These challenges make it almost impossibe for humans to withstand becase the pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience here on Earth. So what the author is getting at is that if we are able to get through all of these challenges and get boots on the ground on Venus, it would mean that when we are to explore or study another planet we can overcome these challenges much faster.
So that is why I think that the author wants us to explore Venus. The first reason being Venus is one of the most Earth like planets in our solar system. The second one being that Venus was once able to be compatable for life. Third is that Venus experiences earthquakes and lightning striks just like Earth does. Finally the last thing that the author brings up is that going to Venus could help us travel to other planets with knowledge on how we can overcome the challenges from Venus. That is why I think that the author wants NASA to study Venus farther and learn more about it.
| 3
|
In this article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" has differnet things that really is not really helpfull cause suposely it drives by its self. But I'm going to give you reason why it good and bad. Some are good thing which could help out the driver driving it, but others that is going to be a problem for that person.
The good thing is that it would use only half of the fuel that a normal car would. And that the car is computerdriven meaning that is a smart car that would would self drive. And that the car well have alot of sensers that will be telling what to be doing.
And the bad thing about it is that the Google cars aren't truly driveless they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways. Or dealing with complicated traffic issues such as navigation through roadwork or accidents. And the problem is that it uses cameras to watch that the driver remain fouce on the road so while the driver watches the road the car watches the driver. So mainly how well it be sure that nothing is going to happen to the driver driving in the road.
They can steer accelerate and brake themself but it still needs of human skill to navigation through work zones and round accidents so mainly that the preson still have to be alert. Still even if traffic laws change new laws will need to oder to cover liability in case of an accident. Cause if the technology fails and someone is injured whos fault will it be the drivers or the manufacturers. Lets say that it was auto driving its self but somthing happens then there was an accident mainly it was the person that made the car not the drive he/she could had been paying atenchen to the road but dont know how to control the car from crashing. So mainly its the techology that had gone wrong.
So my thing is that it could be ok but when comes to technology failer all the problem goes to the manufacturer cause something had gone wrong. And the driver could had been doing all he/she did to do to not get in the accendent but could not prevent it form happing it the veitcal was still in control. So mainly that the car thing could and could not work well cause things could go wrong in unsupected ways that people would not reilizse it but things could go wrong and go out but some gravecanal brake out that could wipe everthing out. So I might go kinda against them if something goes wrong.
| 2
|
Luke Bomberger had no idea how his life would change after gradutating high school. After graduating high school Luke Bombergers friend asked his if he wanted to go on a cattle boat. The reason they had the cattle boats was because World War II had just ended in Europe. After World War II ended many countries were crumbling. They needed the cattle boats for milk and meet to feed the people who had no home because of the war. I will list some reasons why he said yes.
A reason Luke Bomberger joined the cattle boat knew it would be fun. Another reason Luke Bomberger joind the Europe on a cattle boat trip was because he said "Luke couldn't say no. He knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime." Luke went on his first trip in August 1945 when he had orders to go to New Orleans. Luke and the other crew members arrived on the 14th of August, 1945. It took about 2 weeks to cross the atlantic ocean.
While Luke was on a trip to Greece he had his 18th birthday, Luke could've gone to the military, but his draft board told him to stay. By the time Luke was dicharged he had been on 9 cattle boat trips, that is the most of a sea going cowboy.
| 0
|
Do you really think the "Face on Mars" was created by aliens? The "Face" is nothing but an ordinary landform of Mars. Pictures, common sense, and science have proved that.
First, there are pictures that show what the "Face" really is. The "Face" is nothing but a common mesa(2). The mesa just looks like a face because of a coincidence.
Second, any person would know that NASA would rather have money than another secret. The discovery of alien life on Mars would be very rewarding in cash, and the defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars(5). They want there to be an ancient civilization because it would mean tons of money for them.
Finally, science proves that theory to be completely wrong. There have been absolutely no signs of any life whatsoever on Mars(7). If there's no life to build it, how can it be built by life?
As I said, the "Face of Mars" is nothing but a common mesa. All of these reasons have proved that. Now, if you excuse me, I have to get back to my research.
| 2
|
How well something is said and in what way it is said to the audience plays a role in how the big or small the impact is; Depending on how well written something is makes a difference as well. In a passage called "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author gives an excellent essay on why traveling to Venus is a worthwhile journey.
For example, the author states, at one time Venus is believed to have been the closest resimbled to Earth. In paragraph 4, the text states, "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supportes various forms of life, just like Earth." The planet has a rocky surfaces and also has features such as valleys, mountains and craters. The author states,"The value of returning to Venus seems indisputable.." This proves that the author presents relatable evidnece that the journey to Venus is a worthwhile trip.
The author gives NASA as an example of the information that is provided in the passage. In paragraph 7, "NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus..." The author states that NASA is working on using a device like a modern computer. The paragraph also states how there are problems with NASA's idea as well. The author gives an acurate example to help the reader picture what it would be like. This proves that the author can give evidence that supports the overall claim.
On the contray, the author gives more background information than what good could come from studying Venus. The author states all the information that desscribes the atomosphere and what the surface of Venus is like but gives very little information that concerns the reason why Venus should be explored. However, without the background information about Venus's surfaces and atmosphere it may not be understood as to why the journey to Venus is such a trouble. The author provides information that can help understand the reason that astronomers should study Venus.
In conclusion, the author does well at supporting the idea that the trip to Venus is worth taking. The author states information that is from reliable sources, such as NASA. This proves that the author has a well supported idea that studying Venus is a worthwhile pursuit even thorugh the dangers that are going to be faced. The author provides a wide variety of reliable information that supports his claim allowing for a strong claim. The author gave a well written essay that can appeal to all people and change their mind to see in the way of the author's claim.
| 4
|
You should join the seagoing cowboys. A seagoing cowboy is where you go over seas and take care of animals to help a country. A reason you should go to the sea going cowboys is that it's not only going to another county, but you can see nastional monuments and explore fun places. Luke Bomberger said that you will have an amazing time there. He also said that it was more than an adventure it was opening up the world to him. Luke Bomberger said that it's way more exiting than the job he had. He said that he got to see the acropolis in greece and he got to marvle at the panama Canal on his way to china. It might take awile on the trip there but you'll get to see amazing creatures and outstanding vews. Being a seagoing cowboy is one of the most fun things you will ever do in your whole entire life. I promise you will have the best time of your lives.
| 1
|
Driverless cars have always been a big idea for the future. However, there are some really important pros and cons for driverless cars. Driverless cars can be very dangerous to not only the individual driving, but also to everyone around. Perhaps driverless cars isn't such a good idea. Your biggest concerns would be the technology failing and the safety of everyone around it.
Safety is the MAIN key to a driverless car. Since a driverless car would be driverless, not only the driver would need to be alert but everyone around it would need to be, which is common sense for any type of vehicle or transportation. Considering the fact that the human being is always in charge of an accident with a regular car. That woudn't be the case for a "driverless car". Now even though the driverless car have sensors and other types of monitoring to prevent accidents and disfunctions, who's to say the driver isn't paying attention when they need to be and something goes wrong. In paragraph 9 it talks about how traffic laws are wriiten to assume that the human is in control at all times. That's completely understandable, if the human doesn't do what he needs to do to make sure his manufacturer is working correctly, it would be his fault for not taking care of it.
For everyone else around a driverless car, would always be in great danger. No matter how well the car itself is functioning, you dont know if everyone else is paying attention to their own vehicle. Pedestrians around the driverless cars have no control over what it does. If something happens to a pedestrian, who's responsibility is that? If a sensor on the car isn't working properly, which it should be, there would be more deaths and injuries to people around the vehicle and to the person inside of the vehicle. The minor issues of a driverless vehicle could cause a huge problem.
Even though having a driverless car seems like such a good idea, there could be many things to go wrong. For example, the manufacturing could disfunction in the middle of driving. Now someone that would condone a driverless car would say, "You would need to make sure everything is properly working before taking it out on the road." That's actually not all you would need to do. Not only do you need to make sure everything is working properly, you would need to make sure what ever is functioning the car is functioning correctly at all times. One of the biggest concerns could be a driver might not know what could be wrong with a car and if something is wrong with the system, he wouldnt know and the car would just break down or stop working.
Driverless cars could seem like a good idea sometimes when your lazy becuase you don't have to worry about actually driving the vehicle yourslef. Of course people are going to find a driverless car fascinating, but the most important thing you would want to worry about is safety and having the best functioning technology. Technology can always fail, so no matter how well it may seem to be working, anything could happen at anytime.
| 3
|
Venus is important to study because long ago it could of have supported life. But, now that there are dangers of studying the plant some call Venus, Earth's twin.
Studying Venus would be good for Earth because if Venus "could have supportted various form of life" means the somewhere in Venus curroded and if that it mite steer us away from becoming a secondary Venus. Do to Venus being very difficult to study because of the "pressure is 90 time greater than" Earth and it's temperature average being "over 800 degrees making it difficult to land on an stay living on for a medium period of time or enough time to gather sample for studying.
although that Venus would be good to explore for science sake. It would be a bad idea for the fact that Vence's atmosphere is mainly "sulfuric acid." We as a whole trying to do test flight to Venus was a good idea so that we know now is that going to Venus is a bad idea because in "three decades" "not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus." Do to these reasons I think it is a very bad idea to study Venus because of all the danger of it.
| 1
|
Have you ever wanted to know what a Seagoing Cowboy is? Well, today you a going to learn what a Seagoing Cowboy is. You should join the Seagoing Cowboy progam because its a progam that delivers Animals, Food Supply, and or car parts. The Seagoing cowboy program was started in World War 2 it offically launched bussiness with the UNRRA to take care of the horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas.
In paragraph 1, it states that," Luke Bomberger had no idea that his life would change soon after his High School Graduation. He was working two part-time jobs when his friend Don Reist invited him to go to Europe on a Cattle Boat." Also in paragraph 2, "It was 1945, World War II was over in Europe, and many Countries were left in ruins. To help these countries recover their food supplies, animals, and more, 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA. UNRRA hired "Segoing Cowboys" to take care of the horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas.
Next, In August 1945, the received their orders to report to New Orleans. They got their seaman's papers and boarded the SS Charles W. Wooster, headed for Greece-with a cargo of 335 horses plus enough hay and oats to feed them.
Luke turned 18 before arriving in Greece, which mean he could be drafted for military service. By the time he was discharged in 1947, Luke had made nine trips the most of and Seagoing Cowboy
This is why i think you should join the Seagoing Cowboys Program because they help people with the food supply, water, and many other things
| 1
|
There is a debatable path in the future between the use of cars and driverless cars. This is shown throughout the article, "Driverless Cars Are Coming." Although driverless cars are a huge step in the development of technology, there are numerous potential negative aspects that can arise.
Driverless cars should not be used in the future due to the possibilities of a significant increase in the amount of accidents, and the failure of technology.
To begin with, driverless cars should not be used due to the fact that driverless cars are still dependent on human activity, in some situations, which could increase the amount of accidents.
When a person or driver is in a driverless car they may think that the car is in complete control and fall asleep or participate in other activies that would normally distract a driver.
However, this can cause a problem because driverless cars are still dependent on human activity in some situations.
In the text it states, "This means that the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires."(paragraph 7).
If the human driver does not remain alert this can result in an accident.
This is a negative aspect of driverless cars because they are made to be more simple, however, they can result in accidents just as easy as a normal human driver.
Additionally, another factor leading into the idea that driverless cars should not be used is the potential failure of technology causing problems with the law.
In the text it states, "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault - the driver or the manufacturer?"(Paragraph 9).
This is an interesting point brought up in the article because the possibility that the technology fails and results in an accident can cause numerous problems. As seen in technology today; it is not perfect and problems arise daily.
This would not change in the future.
If an individual's driverless car got in an accident due to a technology error, the individual would blame the manufacturer causing an increased amount of dissagreements.
More laws would have to created due to this possibility.
In the article it states, "...even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident."(paragraph 9).
This shows that the use of driverless cars are not as easy as it sounds due to the potential failure in technology.
In conclusion, the use of driverless cars should be prohibited due to the fact that it would increase the amount of accidents and the potential failure in technology. Although it is a major stepping stone in todays technology, it risks the saftey of individuals all across the world.
| 3
|
"Teenager girl gets into a deadly car accident due to her self-driving car shutting down." This is one of the main reasons why i am 100% against Driverless cars. Yes, having a self-driven car could be fun, and could help out some people. But for others having a car that is supposed to drive itself could be not only boring and tiring. But for me I would say that it would be dreadful, and dangerous.
Having a self-driven car is a terrible idea to me. I say that because what if you are driving, and then something unexpected happens on the road that the car is unaware of and the car stopps working? I dont know about you, but that is one of my biggest fears. I would hate to have a car and not know what could happen or what the car is capable of doing. Some may say that its a self-diven car, so it would never do that, and that not knowing what are car is capable of doing is good. But to me that is not good at all, i hate not knowing everything there is to know about my car. Thats not only scary, but its stressful too. It builds up stress and it makes you feel like to have to be worried everytime you get into your car.
Another reason why i say people should never get a self-driven car is that it would be tiring. Like your in a car all day, but your not driving it. Your litterally just sitting in a car waiting for something to happen so you could take over. When im in a car sitting in the passengers seat i get tired a lot and i ofthen fall asleep. Now could you imagine be in the drivers seat of a car, rolling down the street, not doing anything but looking out the window hoping something would happen and you could finally take over and start to drive. Just reading that sounds tiring, i would most defineatley fall asleep and then something would happen and then i would really be in trouble.
My last reason why i feel no one should ever get a self-driven car is because no one wants to have a car that they cant drive. And i feel that that is exactly what you are getting when you are dealing with a self-driven car. i feel that you basically wated your hard earned money on a car that you have to wait to drive. I say that because in the passage it clearly states that when you are in a driverless car all you have to do is look out for the car, and then when something seem to be wrong you take over. Thats no fun to me and it would honestly make me mad.
having a driverless car is like having a sick baby. You never know when its going to just stop working. And you will never know whats wrong with it because it cant talk to you and it will never respond.
| 2
|
Driverless Cars vs. Human Driven Cars
Growing up in the age of technology, many scholars like me have been able to see the increased growth of technolgy around us.
Technology in the last 20 years has rapidly grown in ways not seen before.
Even in cars safety has increased in the last ten years with the introduction of safety sensors, anti rollover protection, and brake assist, all advancements have made cars much safer according to the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety (IIHS).
However this day in age the push and roll out of self driving veichles is advancing rapidly.
With the increased push for self driving cars I can't see self driving cars within the near future.
First off self driving cars and their technolgy is very expensive, especially for the lower class to afford. All this great technology and advancements comes at an unpresidented price that many may not be able to afford.
As shown in paragraph four of "Driverless Cars Are Coming", "The most important bit of technology in this system is the spinning sensor on the roof. Dubbed LIDAR, it uses laser beams to form a constantly updating 3-D model of the car surroundings".
This day in age this technology is to expensive many and is not tested on enough.
Second the safety of many is at jeapordy, as we all know technology is not always reliable so how can we trust the safety of cars? Especially in places where road conditions are not favorable like icy roads or steep and mountanous places. How can veichles properly drive these road conditions without avoiding a crash or dangering surroundings like pedestrian and bikers. As shown in paragraph seven this quote proves that cars can not be completlely driverless, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are deisgned to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills".
This excerpt greatly shows the dangers self driven cars poses, especially if the car needs human assitance and the human is not paying attnetion, which most likley occur if driving isn't done most of the time.
Lastly in the liklely hood a selfdriven car is involved in a crash from minor accidents to wrongful death incidents, who is liable? The advancements of self driving cars will create a new problematic situation for many who may become in self driven car accidents. As shown in paragraph nine, the introduction will create new changes to current laws, "Still even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover the liability in the case of an accident". This quote exagerates the legal vs. ethical dangers of self driven cars which is another debatable topic.
The introduction and testing of self driven cars and increased safety is a great advancement for the well being of human kind. What so ever I disagree with introducing self driving cars this day in age. With self driving cars we need to conduct more tests and be certain that these will be the safest mode of transport. Also before the introduction of self driving cars laws and legal issues need to be taken care of before the rollout of self driving cars. If all these are conducted I can see human driven cars a thing of the past in half a century or so but for right now it is best and safest if we stick to human driven cars because
of all the unknowns.
| 3
|
Joining this prgram was the best. There was a few incidents that happened while I was on this trip, but it was an amazing experience.
When I was on that ship it felt good. I was around all the animals. I mean who wouldnt want to go on a trip. The air out there feels good, taking care of animals was also a lot of fun. And being with my friend made it better. When he asked me if I wanted to go, I couldnt say no. Id never get a chance like this again.
I cracked my ribs but that didnt stop me from enjoyong where I was. My ribs hurted bad but this was an incident, a little mistake but a big combat. But that did stop me from enjoying the things around me. I even visited some cool places while a shore. Seeing the big blue ocean and waves was pretty. Helping out was a fun job. The animals were all friendly and the games that were played were fun to watch and to participate.
Being on night watch was scary because it was pitch black and the boat was very rocky. I got thruough the night eventually so everything was ok. Having people there with me and everyone being friendly
was a nice feeling. In my opoinion, I think everyone should have this experience because somed people have never been to sea, or they never ridden on boat before. Its alot of fun there and a nice place to explore and be with animals and just kind of relax.
In the end, I had alot of fun. A little mishap happened but other than that it was a ball of joy. Everyone should get a chance really. To have a nice experience on the ocean instead of being afraid to go because of sea sick and stuff. Itll be alot of fun if people go. They will enjoy thereselves and be alright.
| 2
|
MONTH_DAY_YEAR
Goodmoring senator before I start , I would like to ask how are you doing and how's your family. I hope everybody health is great and family problems. Today I want to talk to you about some little problem that's not going as well as I thought it was going to go. Electoral College is not a good idea for us citizens. Because everybody in this country that works and come from another country , should be able to vote for their President. The Electoral College consists of 583 electors. A majority of 270 electoral vote is required to elect the President.
The presidential election is held every four years on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. Us citizens think that's a better idea. Don't you think? The presidential election most have a "winner-take-all" system that awards all electors to the winning presidental candidate. And after the presidential election, yout governor prepares a "Certificate of Ascertainment". Listing all of the candidates who ran for President in your state along with the names of their respective electors. The electors are generally chosen by the candidate's political party.
According to Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole they agreed on abolishing the electoral college . The electoral college won the popular vote but lost the presidency over 60% of voters. What that means? 60% of the people didn't agree with the electoral college. The single best argument against the electoral college is what they might call the disaster factor. Us the American people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century. The state legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors , and that those electors could always defy the will of the people.
At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each states they know they have no chance of winning , focosing only on the tight races on the "swing" states. During the 2000 compaign seventeen states did not see the canditates at all. Including Rhode Island and South Carolina. Also voters in 25 of the lqrgest media markets didn't get to see a single campaign ad. The electoral college is unfair, outdated , and irrational. The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertionw without much basis in reality. Bob Dole was right. Abolish the elctoral college!
In conclusion, The Electoral College is widely regarded as an anachronism , a non-democratic method of selecting a president that ought to be overruled by declaring the candidate who receives the most popular votes the winner. There are five reasons for retaining the Electoral College despite its lack of democratic pedigtee; all are practical reasons, not liberal or conservative reasons. This is all I wanted to tell you , I hope you listen to what I'm trying to tell you. I know I am not the only one that thinks like this. If you would like to contact me back you could email me at EMAIL_ADDRESS. Thankyou and have a great day!
PROPER_NAME
| 0
|
Dear Senator,
I know that you have many issues to think about and havee a lot of decisions to make, but I think it the subject of the Electoral College is a very improtant subject for you to ponder. The Electoral College needs to be changed, we need to vote for the presidency with the popular vote. I believe that the Electoral college needs to be taken away because it's not the peoples president when voting with the Electoral College, the legislature could approve people to be electors that are all against a certain candidate, and it is a very confusing process for people to understand.
First, the Electoral College should be changed because it is not the peoples president when voting with the Electoral College. The people ar evoting for the president, but not really. They are actually voting for a slate of electors, who then choose what canidate there electoral votes should go to. The whole point of a democracy is to let the people of the country have a say in who is in charge, but with the Electoral College this is not happening. The people are saying who they want for president but if the slate of electors does not agree, then the votes go the other way. This was expressed in "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses are wrong" by Bradford Plummer. In the passage he says, "Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for aslate of elctors, who in turn elect the president. If you lived in Texas, for insatnce, and wanted to vote for John Kerrry, you'd vote for a slate of 34 Democratic electors pledged to Kerry. On the off chance that those electors won the statewide election, they would go to Congress and Kerry would get 34 electoral votes."
In addition, the Electoral College should be abolished because the legislature could approve people to be electors that are all against a certain candidate. The Legislature is technically responsible for picking electors and theycould very well pick electors that are all against a certain candidate. Everyone says the system is so strong but is it really? The fact that a group of people opposing one candidate could be the electors for that state and could totally changed the votes doesn't make the system look so strong. Plummer adressed this situation in his passage, he stated, "Back in 1960, segregationista in the Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the democratic electors wiht new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy. (so that the popular vote for Kennedy would not have actually gone to Kennedy)."
Finally, the Electoral college system needs to be taken away because it is very confusing. The whole system is just a jumble of different things. There are so many different steps and processes that tend to confuse the voters. When the voters get confused they often end up voting for the wrong candidate or making a mistake. If the voting system was just, the voters voted for who they pleased, then the votes were counted, then all the votes from states are added together, and then whoever had the most votes won, the whole thing would just be much easier. I belive that when the situation is as impportant as voting for our president, it should be as easy and flawless as possible. For example, when I was in seventh grade, I learned about the Electoral College in civics class. learing about the Electoral College was one of the hardest and most complicated thing I learned that year. How are people supossed to vote, if they have no idea how the system works?
In conclusion, I believe that the electoral college needs to be abolished because it's not the peoples president when voting with the Electoral College, the legislature could approve people to be electors that are all against a certain candidate, and it is a very confusing process for people to understand.
Thank you foy your time,
PROPER_NAME
| 4
|
In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author has suggeted to study Venus a worthy pirsuit despiting the dnagers it presents. Venus is the second planet from the Sun . Venus is a bright star in the night sky , we can see Venus from dis but is very challenging to see up close . Venus is the closest planet to Earth referring to size and density . At time we are closer to Mars and sometimes we are closer to Venus . In this essay I will be talking about all the dangers to study Venus and sending humans to go study Venus .
We all may think Venus is a beautfiul planet , there is nothing wrong with Venus , why can't we just land on Venus and study it ? Well , we were all wrong Venus is one of the most dangerous planet to land on . Venus is covered with almost 97% of carbon dioxide , which makes it challening to see because of all the clouds of sulfuric acid . In paragraph 3 it states "On the planet's surface, temperatures avergae over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." This quote is staing how dangerous Venus can be . It also states "such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and
would liquefy many metals." As I have been saying Venus is too dabgerous to go study but the author believes we should anyway . As the author suggest that studying Venus , here is why and how we should study Venus . NASA has an idea for sending humans to study Venus . In paragraph 5 it states "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray." Humans can survive studying Venus using the propers ways to prevent anyone from dying. In the paragraph it states "temperatures would be toasty at around 170 degrees fahrenheit , but the air pressure would be close to of sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful , and radiation would not exceed earth levels . Not easy conditions , but survivabal for humans." This quote is stating that we can be able to survive those type of conditions . Therfore , we can be able to study Venus by sneidng humans , despite the dangers Venus presents.
As we can see anything is possible , even if Venus has some very dangerous conditions . Throughout this essay , the author suggests studying Venus worthy because for one humans , people would like to know what Venus is like . Many researchers are trying their best to land or hover over Venus despite the dangers . Overall , this essay is like a challenge to see if any human can survive and get any information of Venus .
| 3
|
Although it does seem like looking back to the past is the right thing, sometimes changing the past can have good effects for the future. The founding fathers that established the United States Constitution also established the Electoral College. Even though it has been used for many years it is the not most accurate form of voting. The popular vote is much more accurate in which the citizens of the United States vote for who they want.
One of the many problems with the Electoral College system is that the citizens of that state don't vote for president. Instead they vote for electors which then vote for president. They vote for the electors that they think are trustworthy and are going to vote for the candadite they want to win. Sometimes voters get confused about the electors an end of voting for the wrong candidate. In addition there can be a tie in the Electoral College and in that case the election would be thown to the House of Reprsentatives where state delegations vote on the president.
Every state receives an amount of point decided by the population of that state. "It is unfair for voters because of the winner takes all system." (Source 2, Paragraph 13) If a state is won by only 3 votes the candidate that wins the state, takes all the points for that state. Therefore it is possible to win the Popular vote and lose the Electoral Vote. In that case the winner of the electoral vote would be pronounced president of the United States of America.
The Electoral College is unfair, outdated, and irrational. Each state has a favorable amount of democrats or republicans, therefore, candidates don't go to states or run ads in states they know the cannot win due to the state being to far into the enemy party. States that change from a democrat to a republican state and vice versa are called "swing" states. Those are states that the candidates running for president will want to visit and run ads in.
Electoral College has followed us since the Constitution was established, but it is time that we leave it behind and look to a new voting system. We need to abolish Electoral College because it is an unreliable way for to run the campaign for becoming the president of the United States of America.
| 2
|
The world of technology is rapidly increasing. Along with this comes new inventions. One invention in particular is the driverless car. This car has both positive and negative affects on society. However, the driverless car is not safe and could be bad idea.
The driverless car could potentionally be a great thing. For example, this would be a fun or new way to drive and you could have in-car enterntainment. These cars can brake, accelerate, and even steer by themselves. Many people see this as a dream, but in reality it's a lot of pointless work.
At this point, driverless cars are not fully driverless. These cars need a human operator to get in and out of driveways, navigate through traffic and construction, and to go around accidents. The driver never really gets a break from driving like they would expect. The driver must remain alert while sitting in the car because the car is uncapable of doing everything itself. Some companies even stated that they would place cameras in the car to ensure that a driver is paying attention to the road. Not only is this an invasion of privacy, but it is unethical and strange. Another reason as to why this would not be a good idea is because all traffic laws would have to change regarding the use of driverless cars, and new laws would have to be written and enforced. An issue with this is figuring out who would be responsible in the case of an accident. This would either be the driver, or the manufacturer of the vehicle.
All in all, the driverless car would have to be a lot more updated if it was ever in full use. There are many problems with this idea, involving accidents, new laws, privacy, and the idea of still having to pay full attention. Many people would expect a whole new way of driving, but really the only thing a person would change is not steering and braking the entire time.
| 3
|
The use of this technology to read students emotional expressions is not very valuble. No one can read emotions like teachers and peers can. If a student is confused or needs help they can simply ask for it, theres no need for a computer to tell what they need help with.
When some people are working on assignments on they often use trial and error and sometimes they just need to think about the problem before they do it. This could get confusing for the computer because when your thinking you often will look confused or you might be confused but later figure it out. You shouldnt have to rely on a computer to tell how your feeling to get help. Dr. Huang said "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored... Then it could modify the lesson, Like an effective human instructor." This ay sound like a good idea but if a student is getting bored they dont need there lesson modified to help them and most kids are going to be bored during school thats just how the majority of students are.
One thing that would be extremly hard to control would be when kids make weird or strange faces. How will a computer distinguish between an emotion due to the lesson and emotion due to something else. Like when a student is talkling to there friend and they laugh or smile. A student could also try to look bored or confused on purpose just to get out of doing certain work. Another big issue is the fact that not every students facial features are the same. One students face could look way different from the faces that the software the computer was built to recognize.
The last reason as to why this wont be a very popular tool in classrooms is because most school computers dont have cameras and wont be able to afford them or the software needed to run the programe. Of course they could get special fuding for the equipment but theres way better things that money could go towards to help the students excel in more ways then on a computer.
Its a very interesting idea but theres just way to many issues involved with it that wont allow it to takwe off like they invision. Its also just not anything that holds much value to schools If a student needs help they ask a computer cant tell what student needs better than a teacher can. It could be used for private use or maybe for something else but not in the education field.
| 2
|
In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" it show that the author likes to study Venus because it is like earths "twin". the earth can be dangerous but worth learning about. the earth can be livaible for humans with harsh conditons. not knowing what we can have without trying cannot be the right choice.
Venus is called earth's twin becaue as in the text it states "Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms to density and size, and occasionally the closet in distance too."(paragraph 2). we know we have a planet that is like earth can be one of the most exciting thing to know. we can survive on another earth is another.
If we were to ever go to venus we will be able to live there but with harsh conditions. As in the texts states "on the planet's surface, tempertaures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmosheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we have experience on out own planet." (paragraph3). normal weather to Venus is nothing compared to our earth. although they are alike.
Going to Venus would be dangerous but in realtiy if we don't go and study our earths twin we might not ever have the knowlege we can have by going. in the article it states "The value of returning to Venus seems indispoutalde, but what are the options for making such a mission both safe and scientifically productive."(paragraph 4). if we don't try we won't learn anything new about what we don't have.
Having a earth as similar to earth can be exicting when it comes to studing it. going to a diferent planet with different condtions unlike ours can be dangerous also, not know what could have been known is a tough disicion.
| 1
|
To the fellow citizens, the advantages of limiting car usage in the world could limit the numbers of miles driven, passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe, and the parks and sports center also have bloomed throughout the city.
To begin informing the fellow citizens more about the advantages, the numbers of miles can be limited. In the united states the numbers of miles driven peaked and dropped steadily thereafter, according to an analysis by doug shorts of advisor perspectives, an investment research company. As of April 2013, the number of miles driven per person was nearly 9 percent below the peak and equal to where the country was in January 1995. There has been a large drop in the percentage of 16- 39- year-old getting a licenses. Driven was found that young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009. All according to source 4:The end of car culture.
To continue the advantages, passenger cars are responisble for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissons in Europe. Beijing and china are well known as one of the most polluted cities in the world. In the suburbs, where middle-class families from Chicago to Shanghai tend to make their homes makes a huge impediment to current efforts to drasticallyreduce greenhouse gas emissions from tailpipes, experts says. Cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emisson.
Futher more the parks and sports center also have bloomed throughout the city of Mockus, according to the citys mayor. the bicycle paths that is 118 miles has made parks and sports centers bloomed, smooth side walks, and rush-hour restriction have dramatically cut traffic which means less congestion. New restaurants and upscaled shooping districts have cropped up, which means the bicycle path made store good income
| 1
|
The face on Mars is just a natural landform because it states in the text that the only reason the rock looks like a face is because it has shadows from the sun, and in this case the shadows give the "face" eyes, mouth, and a nose.
Yes even though there have sightings of UFO's or ( Unidentified Flying Object) the conspiracy theorists say that this face is an alien artifact but it states that the only reason why they say it is a feace is so more people are attracted to Mars.
The landform int a real face because if you compare the "face" to an Earth rock in that shape they would look the same, until you add some light from the sun causing shadows, and it would include the facial parts of any human man or woman.
As you see from paragraph 3 you will see that it states in the last sentence " The author's reasoned it would be a good way to engage the public and attract attention to Mars." Although, it did the scientist thought that tehy have accomplished something huge by tricking people into thinking it was a huge head.
In my conclusion, these are the reasones that the natural landform is not a face.
| 1
|
In the matter of the electoral college, being either abolished or kept intact, i take the side of keeping it intact for the reason that even though you are technically not voting for the president, but for a slate of delegates that are loyal to the candidate, it is in fact very useful. First, the number of electoral votes are given by the population of each state, and second, there is a near certanty of a outcome because of the winner take all system.
To begin with, the electoral college is based on the population of the state, meaning, that the bigger the state population, the more electoral college represantitives they get. So, if California has the biggest population in the U.S, and the district of Columbia has the smallest, then it isn't fair that they get the same number of votes, either small nor large, because there are more people in one state then the other. Although people say that the electoral college is a bad thing, and think that it is an anarchism, it is not, for it is one of the things that keep our counntry in near perfect shape.
Another reason that the Electoral College should be kept, is that there is a near certainty of a outcome. Take the 2012 election between Obama and Romney, where Obama recieved 61.7% of the electoral vote compared to the 51.3% populatrity vote cast to him. People argue that the electora l college has a diaster factor, or that the system allows for much more to happen that doesn't. Thats the problem. It hasn't happened and most likely won't happen, because if were going to happen then it would've already happened and Congress wouldve revised it and made sure that it didnt happen or that it could be delayed so that a solution was made possible, and that the election went as continued.
To conclude, even though the electoral college has many flaws that are yet to be shown and or fixed, it is the only way we have to elect presidents, and thats how it should be, because you can't have a perfect thing without flaws that have to be fixed
| 2
|
Is the Electoral College fair or not, thats is was many people are trying to figure out. The Electoral College is a process of votes that allows people to choose a president, but some contries get to vote and some dont even see a campaign ad. I believe the Electoral College is not a fair process because under the Electoral College system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president, also the winner-takes-all system doesn't rely on the states that have no chance of winning but relies on the tight races in the "swing" states.
There are many things wrong with the Electoral College that can ruin the vote system for a long time. According to Source 2, under the Electoral College the voters dont even get to vote for the candidate they want, but have to vote to a slate of electors which is unfair. Voters sometimes cannot contol who they vote for so voters sometimes get confused and vote for the wrong candidate. It depends on the state to pick the slate of electors on state conventions, or even by presidential candidates themselves.
The winner-takes-all syestem can be very unfair to some states who want to vote for a candidate. The winner-takes-all system is unfair because the candidates dont spend time on those states that have no chance of winning, but relies on the states that can win. 17 states including Rhode Island and North Carolina dont even get to see the candidate because they are states that have no chance of winning. Also 25 large media markets dont even get to see a campaign ad because the candidates dont bother to but one up. The fate of the presidency is in the hands of a few voters in ohio which is just unfair to other states.
I believe that the Electoral College is unfair because they have done many wrong things that can effect other states and the vote system for a very long time.
| 2
|
In the article Driverless Cars Are Coming, there is an argument about the driver and the manufacturer. Most driving laws focus on keepping drivers, passengers, and pedestrians safe, and lawnmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers. Some manufacturers hope to do that by bringing in a car entertainment and information systems that use heads up dispalys. If the technology fails and someone is injured, who fault is it? The driver or the manufacturer?
With cars becoming smart over the years and new technogly tried with these cars, there has been less accidents. There are sensors now that can tell people when they are in danger and there are safety bags for peeople's safety in case they do get in a accident. But manufacturers are trying to make it bigger and make the cars smarter to decrease the ammount of car accidents there are. There is probably a lot of testing and tries for the next new big thing. I guess it depends if the manufacturer does fail, they'll try again but i dont think it's their fault for trying to make more safety for people. It will defientely be a new change to everyone if they succeed at this, and people will just have to adjust to it for their safety.
If the driver manufacturer does fail and someone get injured, it will not be the manufacturer fault for focusing on keeping drivers safe. They will have to do a lot of testing on it anyway, so highly doubt anyone will get hurt. Authomakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems ahead will be solved. Everyone just wants what's for the best and that is keeping drivers off their phones and focused on the roads. The smart cars can help that happen, so there will be a lower ammount od people in accidents.
| 2
|
Imagine having a car that drives itself. Not having yourself put your foot on the accelerator or even the break. Having the car steer itself also. Seems too unreal right? Having cars that drive them selves seems like a whole big mess. People these days are getting to lazy to get into a car and drive it yourself. My position on driverless cars are that I am against it. These cars should not be developed for humans.
These driverless cars of the "future" are not truly driverless. According to the text, there still has to be a driver in the car to drive it in situations like: pulling in and out of driveways, dealing with complicated traffic issues, and navigating through roadwork or accidents. Even though the car can steer, accelerate, and brake without the driver doing it. The car still needs to keep the human alert of such things like going around accidents or driving through zone work. The future generation of teens will not know how to drive a car properly with these new driverless cars. What kind of person would want a driverless car that still needs the help of a driver? According to Dr. Werner Huber, a BMW project manager driver, he says " We have to interpret the driving fun in a new way." The manufacturers want to have in-car entertainment. Driving should not be fun, it should taken more serious and with more caution. These in-car entertainment would be to distracting for the driver. Many new technology has had malfuntions. These new cars could break down, or even not let the human driver take over when it has to.
My position on driverless cars is that I am against it. Having a car that does all the work for you does not seem like a good idea. These cars should not be developed for humans to drive. The driverless cars seem too dangerous and to difficult to handle.
| 2
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.