full_text stringlengths 737 20.5k | score int64 0 5 |
|---|---|
Have you ever read the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus"?
The author does a good job supporting the idea the studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents in the article.
In paragraph four, the author states that, " Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well have once been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." (par. 4) the author then explains that the planet was probably covere in Earth-like features such as oceans. This could give us insight on what happened to Venus to change it into the toxic and empty wasteland that it has become and how something similar could happen on Earth, if we choose to explore the planet.
throughout paragraphs five through seven, the author explains methods and tools we could use to better study the planet. the author mentions NASA's idea for sending humans to study the surface of the planet. ' A blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape." (par. 5) and the use of mechanical computers in paragraph seven, "Simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested i a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions." (par. 7) " Another project is looking back to an old technology called mechanical computers." (par. 7) Mechanical computers use gears and levers to make calculations instead of using electronics, maiking them more resistant th the pressure, heat and other forces of Venus's Surface
In the concluding paragraph, the author gives a couple of reasons and benefits of studying Venus, " Striving to meet the challenge presented by Benus has balue, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also becuase human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." (par. 8) this means that we can not only learn about Venus itself but also prepare us for the problems that may be presented by either other planets, or even our own in the future.
In conclusion, the author does a good job supporting the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. The author does a good job because the give reasons to study the planet, examples on how we can study the planet, and an explanation on why astronomers want to study Venus. | 3 |
Driverless cars
You may think that driverless cars are good but I think that driverless cars are senseless I wouldnt want that I would want to drive my car myself. I waited a long time to get my driving license and drive my own car but no they had to come up with the diverless car and make all the other cars seem useless. Im going to figure out what makes this car so good, and see if would come in handy because its alot of people are craveing this car.
This car seem so crazy because what if my car startes to act all crazy and catch on fire what am i going to do im waisted my money and time on that car and it would be hard to buy a new one . I think we should all this stick with the cars we are use to. Because when you get this car you wont know what to do, and most people dont read manual to cars they just say they figure it out on their own. Once they try that they end up messing something up and having to spend more money on getting it fixed.
The car may come in handy because they have senseors even though sensors are nothing new they help stop the car like when the person driving the car hits the brake the brake sensors each wheel to ruduce speed so the human can gain controll over his or her car again. It can help older people to like when they arent suppose to be driving. This car is like having a driving assistant. They dont wont need to drive the car would drive by its self that would be good for some old people that like to get out a lot.
Most drivers focus on keeping the riders saft but it this car is a smart car so if they had a accident the car can prevent it from happening. In some staes this car is not saft for people to drive so the car comapany must prove that the car is saft.
if some one gets injured in that car should it be the manufacturer fault or should it be the drivers fault i think that it should be the manufacturer fault because they built they car and i should feel saft I it.
Overall i dont that this car is smart to build because i wouldnt feel saft in it.
I think they should come up with another idea for a car because if a lot of people get hurt it that car they might end up bankrupt and sewd so bad that they would have to close down there shop and just start their retirement. This car seem very senseless and I wouldnt buy it. | 2 |
I believe that NASA or any other space organizations could have a chance to visit other planets, or such as the "Evening Star". Just by reading this article made me think on how this could realy work but only in a matter of time could this happen. My claim to "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" is a positive response because
the author talked about in the story on how thick the atmosphere is, the temperature and the enviroment is like. Venus is a risk to travrel too, but in the long run it'll be worth it.
Earths twin is most likely a deadly plant for right now we could possibly try another solution by visiting it. In paragraph 5 it said "A vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian Landscape" to avoid the 170 degrees Fahrenheit surface its good to make suggestions and try it out on earth before taking it to venus. I agree on having robots visiting venus first before letting humans try for themselves is way better and safe. Robots are made to survive longer then humans for these types of missions, They could bring us information that humans probably could not and would last longer in different climates.
Venus is a deadly planet, But is the second choice if planet Earth would ever
be in a dangerous sitituation and would have to evacuate. Better now then never, If i had the chance to expeirment id take that chance because evenatually Earth wont last forever. It would be a great idea to start now and help our future to be in a safe place. I would make the most of what i got here on Earth to help my grandchildern be alive in the future. Thats why i strongly believe on Venus to being a second home for us to live and see our gerenration of humans live long and forever and keep expanding. | 1 |
The old question has finally been answered, "Was Mona Lisa happy or was she just trying to trick her audience to think that she was." Now, thanks to technology, we are able to figure out how she actually felt. With hard work and coding computers will be able to tell how people are genuinely feeling. This technology will help in schools, working environments and more, people will be able to tell if someone is feeling upset, depressed, happy, bored or content.
In relation to Mona Lisa, the article explains that she is "83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry." This shows that the computer is advanced enough to identify emotions of a woman from many centries ago. Due to the study of human anatomy the computer is able classify emotions like "happiness, suprise, anger, disgust, fear and sadness." With normal identification skills if there was a mix of them people could tell exactly how others felt. For instance if someone got 68% sadness, 22% angry and 10% fear, then people could tell that the person needed help, or was not fine like they said they were. If computers with this technology were in schools teachers would be able to tell if there student were okay. Most students say there okay but with this technology we would be able to perceive if people need help or theorpy. It could change the world by helping prevent less suidcides and self harm or peer pressure and bad decisions. Although it seems this technology could only be in sci-fi movies, the article explains that "It's all about those muscular action units. They even indicate the difference between a genuine smile and a forced one." Even so, with human persection we can not read or figure out everything from people by what they say and how they look but with the extra help from technology we can get even closer. Nick D'Alto confirms that "To an expert, faces don't lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a smiling politican or celebrity isn't being truthful." Yes people have study this for a long time but the computer is just as capable without as much time. The computer reads peoples faces by creating a model and comparing it to the same persons face with no emotion and uses knowledge of the face muscles to determine one's emotions.
However, this technology could also do simple things within a class room like tell if a student is confused or bored or tired. In addition to this information from students schools can find what makes students want to get their education and can get them to enjoy and understand it at the same time. Nick D'Alto claims that "Dr. Huang predicts. Then it could modiy the lesson, like an effective human instructor." Accordingly, with teachers and technology working together it could improve schools for students and teachers.
With this technology it could help overall morality and acedimics within classes. It could also help human communication, and get people and computers to work together more than before. | 3 |
I think that we should not have driverless cars. Because they are not alert and aware as much as a human. Driverless carss can be an advance in technology to where if it gets a virus of some sort it will danger other humans. They could also do something that thier not suppose to like drive into a tree or off the road and into the river or lake. It is very unsafe for people to even be living thier.
He believes that it can fundamentally change the world. They can not handle pulling in and out of driveways or deal with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through road work or accidents. Companies are making computer driven cars. Special touch sensors are installed into the cars. Google car simply announces the driver should be prepared to take over.
A driverless cab to take you wherever you desire without you driving one bit sounds like bus drivers and cab jobs will be taken. Then the all cab and bus companies would shut down. Then it will get bigger to where they make heavy equipment vehicles. It will would then take over construction workers jobs. It will eventually take over truck drivers jobs as well.
Then it will send familes and more people jobless and homless and possibly thier families to leave them. Although it sounds good to have driverless cars but it will ruin lives. It will take over alot of peoples jobs and lives making them homeless to where they can die of starvation. Any car cannot just drive on thier own without an accident reported or someone killed by the car malfunctioning.
But I think the cars are a bad idea becauser technology dont ever work as good as it says. They always will crash or malfunction and they will always ruin someones life. They can ruin someones life bad enough to where it can be permanet. They
will eventually have an accident and just kill someone because it cant handle certain conditions. They will also malfunction and drive its self into a tree or over a bridge or even into someones living room. | 2 |
Ever since their invention, cars have been a very important part of the modern society. Everywhere you look there is someone driving to work, or shopping, or going to a doctor's appointment. These are all advantages to having a car, but if you look closer you can see how these cars may be doing more harm than help. Air pollution is the problem most people see, however cars also keep people from face to face contact when you pass someone on the road, and you can't overlook the extravagant cost of having a car. These are the points of intrest for many scientists, sociologists, and general people all over the world.
Air pollution, the bane of existance for every health and nature lover, is a massive problem that is getting way out of control. In an article by Elisabeth Rosenthal, she explains that passenger cars are responsible for twelve percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe and up to fifty percent in some parts of the United States! If you reduce the amount of cars on the roads, it would lower those numbers drastically. For example, in Paris, they banned certain cars from driving on certain days. The result was astonishing! Street congestion alone went down by seventy percent.
While the pollution goes up, the amount of face to face contact of people goes down. Someone in a car could pass someone else on the highway without knowing that that was someone that they haven't seen in months or even years! Without cars the main way of transportation would be walking and/or biking. When walking and biking you have the ability to talk to people . That person you haven't seen in forever can see you and strike up a conversation. Someone who has had a bad morning can have the opportunity to let out some steam instead of going to work angry and upset.
Something you absolutely can't avoid about cars is the cost. Between the car's cost itself, the insurance every month, the cost of repairs, and the constantly rising gas prices, many people can barely afford it. Without all of those costs, most people could have more money for their home, groceries, education, and many other things.
You can already see the improvements. In 2012, a study showed that driving by younger people decreased by twenty-three percent between 2001 and 2009. Another study showed that there has been a large drop in the percentage of sixteen to thirty nine year olds getting a license. These are the steps we need to take, this is the path to a better, healthier planet as well as the people on that planet. | 2 |
Dear state senator i really think we should keep the electoral college. I mean look at how far we have come in are lives were we have kept this system working for years and it has not faild us yet. If we try to change IT now we will probally screw every thing up and it will probally be to confusing because of how the world is today.
If you look back at the probloms we had in the past we got passed them and came back stronger and improved we really just need new electors and just keep the system the same but get out with the old people and in with the new ones. "This method is a non democratic method also". this method also cant get any more fair because the people vote who they want and whoever has more votes then they win. whats not fair about that?
the electoral college avoids the problom of elections in which no canidate receives a majority of the votes cast. I really think we should keep this method so in the future we can always go back in history and talk about this method and the 23rd amendment. | 1 |
The electoral college is an institution that has always guided the presidential elections. The electoral college is tradition and shouldn't be changed because it has balanced relegation of power within the states, there is almost always a definate winner, and it is able to hold a set timeline for the elections. The college has always been able to choose a president that is able to lead our country well, the electoral college is a representation of the people of the United States of America. As the president's constituents, we have the power to choose our leader, and they make it a little easier for us.
The electoral college takes into account the populations of each state within its calculations. This is why Wyoming has only three votes and Florida has twenty nine. It's nothing to complain about, because it's the same number of people each state has in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, meaning each state has at least three votes, decided by its population. This is not a very bad system because the states with huge populations have a bit of their power curbed by the number of electors. So if Wyoming increases its population, and Florida has its population decreased, one of the electors could be removed from Florida and added to Wyoming, balancing the scale of power between them. It's only fair for a populous state like Florida to have more electors anyway, there are many opinions that are yearning to be heard within the ginormous population, and there must be enough electors who can take it upon themselves to voice them. The Electoral College protects us from the probability of voting just because the candidate is from the same state. A majority of people will vote because of a close association with a candidate if the electoral college is abolished. This is why the electoral college only contains 538 people, because nobody wants millions of voters in California voting for the same candidate just because they are the Governor of California.
Due to the even amount of votes in the electoral college, there is a slight chance of a tie. However, with all but two states being part of the "winner-take-all" system, the chance of that happening are astronomically low. This is why swing states are so important to the canditates, they know that the chances of them winning the votes in the other party's states are almost impossible, so they must gather all of the votes they can from the states that are known for their swing-like tendencies. It also goes the other way, each candidate trusts that their own party's states will vote for them, so there is no need to waste the money and campaign. Unless its the primary elections, candidates don't typically campaign where they know that the votes are all but set in stone. It's like going grocery shopping, if you know that you are allergic to peanut butter and you already have all the jam you need, you will only go for the special bread that everybody fights for right? The candidates are the same, they don't go after what they already have and what they can't have, only what they might earn, or else it's just a waste of money, so nobody should be able to complain about a candidates campaigning.
A president has always been inaugrated on either January 20th or March 4th, to change that would be blasphemous to both the people and to the United States of America. So it is imperitive that the decision is made early, so that tradition and will not be broken. Contrary to popular belief, there is a set timeline that the election process goes through, and without the electoral college, it is highly possible and probable that the timeline will be broken. The election process is guided by this timeline, for example, voting starts on the second Thursday of the month of November every single time. The Electoral College is a huge part of this process also, and to destroy that would be heartbreaking for the nuerotics that can't stand any change in routine. If the Electoral College were to be abolished, and popular vote was to be instigated throughout the country, any semblance of a schedule would be torn away. Problems would spring up all over the place, and everything would all go to hell. Instead of recounts for counties, whole states would need recounts. If a populous state like Texas were to need a recount, never mind a week, a month wouldn't be enough time to recount it all perfectly. The government would be stuck without a leader, and worst case scenario, the United States of America could be put in a state of anarchy by the end of the decade. Then, we wouldn't be United anymore.
The Electoral College has been there from the beginning, and the without it the United States of America could be thrown into chaos. Traditions shouldn't be broken and the Electoral College represents the biggest one of them all, it balances power between each of the states, defines a true winner, and guides the U.S. on a set timeline. It wouldn't be a far stretch to say that the Electoral College helps keep the order of the country. Truthfully, everyone needs some semblance of order, and the Electoral College provides that and more. | 4 |
Yes the use of this technology, facial action coding system can be valuable because if the student are bored or confused the teacher will chang up the lesson. For example when they chang the lesson up they can make it more fun for them and when they are confuse they can slow it down for them and try to help him with it. What this is that more people will pare attention more and will know wants going because it's not boreing. Another thing is when they are confuse they will know how to do it then because the teacher had slow down the lesson and the sturdent will know how to do it then.
Another example is if you are sad they will be a dd that pop up to make you smile if that ad don't work another ad will pop up. What this mean is that this technology can make you happy when you are sad or when you are angry it can make you lagh. So what I am trying to say is that this technolgy can chang the day of your life. This technolgy can help other peolpe out with they life how to tech the lesson and lot more so this will be perfict. | 1 |
I do not think that the new software would be of any use. Yes it is a good idea. But in the artical it gives us an example of if a student is confused or if a student looks mad or angry, the new software would explain the steps over until the student understands. The way I see it for example a student is working on a problem and the see something unusal in the problem and makes a confused face for a least a second the prgram would explain it to them. The student knows how to do the problem and knows how to solve it already but the program brought up step to exaplain it anyway. It would be useless the student could have soveld it already and would have been to the next problem but the Facial Action Coding System got in the students way just to show them how to do something they already know.
In the artical it also tells us to look in a minor or at a friend and make a "smiling face". The friend would see that you are happy yes, but we were told to make that face we had no desire to make that face happy or not, we just made the face, it was a forced smile. In the artical also it says that the computer program would be able to tell a force smile from a genuingly happy smile which what I just explaind that a smile is easy to manipulate. The program could be taking in false information and the program itself would not even know it.
In the artical it also exaplains that ads. That if a ad were to pop up and you would smile the prgram would show another ad just like the previous one and visvursa. The real question is have you ever ever seen a ad so many times that you become angry or frustrated and you smile because the "Skip ad" timer is getting closer and closer to zero the "FAC" would miss-understand your face and bring another ad just like that one. With this program I see very many problems that would not be able to be avoided.
"The new emotion-recognition software tracks facial movements!" Oh great but world class actors and actresses and pull the fake emotions off like no other. Some people dont show emotion and sometimes can be happy but no show it. with all these muscles in your face it could also mean that the face tracker would miss lead the face expressions. You as might as well have a dog look at you and be able to tell if your happy or not, becuase they are much better at reading face expressions.
It is a really good idea but it can be easily manipulated and also be in the way of varius things. I think it would be much much easier if you were to raise your hand and ask for help or just click a button that has different emotions that you could choose from to tell how you are feeling. | 3 |
The limiting of persoanlcar usage has done wonders for the areas that this policy has be implmented. Strictly enviermentaly swpeaking in the cites that have limited their residents persoal car usage the smog rates went drasicly down. Thoughschanges happened in a matter of days. Imagin the changes that could accoure if limited car usage was implmented on a wider scale for the long term. Not only envirermentaly benifical but limited car usage also has large and far reaching econmic and social upsides. The lack of money being waisted on persoanl automobeal transportation leads to a surplus of savings for everyday familes to spend or more nessary items. Socialy limited car usage has be proven to be benifal as a whole also. People living in areas that have already been placed under this polices report signifigent reducions in stress and worrying, leading to much weight off their sholders and a genaeral better aqttude over all.
The first and most obveous advantage of the limed car usage policiy is the masive positive impact the police has the earth. As stated in source one and I quote "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe...and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States.". Now imagin if thoes percentages just went away. In the city of Vauban Germany, an expermental city already under the policy, it did. Another example if Paris. A city that literly had to force the policy of limited car usage apon it people in a desperate attempt to reverse what the evils of personal car usgae was doing to the atmosphere of the city. The personal cars created smog so think the city hit record polution levels that even rivaled Beijing its self, one of the worlds most poluted citys. As stated in source two, the city put a ban on cars with any license plates that were even numbered on the first day from driving and a ban on odd numbered the second day. The positives of the limited car usage plicy was so instantanous that the second day of no driving for odd numbered cars ws deamed not nessary. The massive envirmental advantages of the limited car usage policiy can neiter be denyed or ignored.
The economic advantages of this policy can also not be ignored. To fully grasp the economic upswing that will accure under this policy we must turn our attention the the great city of Bogota, Colombia. In this former Spanish colony turned capital city a program has been set up called the "car-free day". On this day no cars are driven and a festable is set up to promote alternate transportaion and reduce smog. This year two other Colombian citys, Cali and Valledupar joned the event citing the obouse advantages of the policy. "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution" says buisinessman Carlos Arturo Plaza source 3 quotes. The policy as done economic wonders not only for the people but for the city its self. since the day begin in the mid 1990s over 118 miles of bike path have been created, parksand sports centers have bloomed throughout the city, uneven sidke walks have been leveled out, and new resturants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up as reported by source 3. The limited car usage policy cound be the merical policy for citys in need of an economic boost.
Finaly the social advantages of the policy have also been noted.
The evils of the modern day car culture must be destroyed. As said by Carlos Plaza preveously "It's a good opportunity to take away stress". "When i had a car I was always tense. Im mush happier this way" said Heidrun Walter resident of Vauban. Two people on two totaly differnt sides of the world both experenced the social advantages of this policy. Even young people are seeing the advantages according to a study last year that found that driving by young people devreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009 according to source 4.
As one can now clearly see the advantages of limted personal car usage are impossibkle to deny and even harder to ignore. Economicly,socialy, and enviromentaly this policy as done wonders where ever it has been implimented. It has both immeadit and long term positive effects with no odveous negitive effects. Altrnates to personal cars could be things like Bill fords bisiness plan for a world in which personal vehical ownership is replaced witha partnering with the telecommunications industy to create citys in which pedestrians, bicycle, private cars, and public and commerical traffic are woven into a connected netword. The acceptence of limited car usage and the extenciton of modern day car culture is the next step for the advacment of humanity. | 3 |
I would contend that we should not waste our time and money on impractical software like the Facial Action Coding System. An aplication that is used purely for the purpose of reading emotions is usless, due to the fact that we humans can already read each others emotions quite effectively. It is also not valueble because the system reads facial cues and might make a false judgement on a person's actual emotions. Finally, it's unrealistic because it would cost insane amounts of money to upgrade everyone's computer to the quality required to run a system as complex as the Facial Action Coding System.
First and foremost, humans can read other human's emotions without the help of a computer. Since the dawning of time, people have looked at another person's face and been able to tell what they are feeling; why, suddenly, do we need a computer to decipher emotions for us? In paragraph five in the text, the author says, "In fact, we humans perform this same impressive 'calculation' every day. For instance, you can probobly tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face.", this quote clearly implies that humans can read each other's emotions very well. After all, why would it be called "human emotion" if humans couldn't understand it.
Secondly, the computer could make a false judgement. Not all emotions are outward, some we keep on the inside and never show anyone. Some emotions, like anger, can be expressed through a smile or by crying.
Finally, the Facial Action Coding System is usless because it's unrealistic. As seen is paragraph seven when the author says, "Your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile.", the system is very complex. It's clear that it would cost outrageous ammounts of money to upgrade everyone's software to the level required to run a sophisticated system like FACS.
I would assert to you that FACS is a waste of time and money because it's faulty, it's unneeded, and it comes with an unrealistic price tag. A system that can only read emotions based on facial cues would just plainly not work. I see why Dr. Haung was trying to develop such a complex system, but in the end, his work failed. | 3 |
Citizens are often using cars to get from work and back, however if citizens were to stop using cars there could be some advantages like traffic can be reduced, new buildings can be built, and habits of car use can be stopped.
If citizens were to cut down on using cars traffic would be reduced. According to Robert Duffer a person from the Chicago Tribune he states that "congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France after five-days of intensifying smog" (Robert Duffer, paragraph 14). With that being stated by Robert Duffer it should be clear to people that with reduced traffic people are able to get to places where they need to be in just a short matter of time, citizens won't have to worry about being late for whatever it is citizens have to do. Robert Duffer also states that almost 4,000 drivers were fined according to Reuters (12) Citizens should realize that with almost 4,000 people being fined it should tell citizens that they should cut down on car usage to help prevent smog and to also save them money.
Along with citizens cutting down on car usage to reduce traffic if they were to cut car usage new building can be built. According to Andrew Selsky from the Seattle Times he states that "parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city uneven, pitty sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up" (Andrew Selsky, paragraph 28). When citizens cut down on car usage many new things can be built and explored by citizens but if citizens were to not stop car usage then new things wouldn't be built and old things couldn't be replaced or fixed. Andrew Selsky also states that it has seen the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths (27). There is many citizens out in the world that would rather ride bikes than to use a car just to prevent pollution, with 118 miles of bicycle paths there shouldn't really be any car use. Using bicycles could help change the world so much more and less pollution could be created.
Not only with citizens cutting down on car use for new buildings to be built, citizens can stop their habits of car usage if they give it a try. According to Elisabeth Rosenthal a lady from the New York Times she states that "with all these changes, people who stopped car commuting as a result of recession may find less reason to resume the habit" (Elisabeth Rosenthal, paragraph 36).Citizens stopping car commuting could really help those citizens with habits of not being able to stop car commuting which could result in saving the earth and air pollution. Elisabeth also states that a chairman of the Ford Motor Company proposed a partnering with the telecommunications industry to create cities in which pedstrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety (43). While the chairman of the Ford Motor Company is stating this information maybe citizens will change their minds about car usage just to improve safety or to even safe time.
All in all this why citizens should car usage to reduce traffic, new buildings can be built, and to try and stop habits of car use by giving it a try. Citizens trying to do these could help stop air pollution and they could also save themselves money. | 3 |
Limiting car usage has great advantages wether you believe it or not. Sometimes you don't think about it but you really can do harm to yourselves by polluting the air with the gases that the car releases. There are many advantages to limiting car usage such as reducing smog,improving safety and it gets you active.
Smog can greatly affect people while they are driving. In Bogota, Colombia they have a program every year to reduce smog. Throughout the whole day people hiked,biked,skated,or took buses to get to their destination. It has been three straight years that cars have been banned in Colombia. The goal of this program is to promote alternative transportation and to reduce smog. The plan is so effective that even the rain won't stop the people from participating. This plan is set to spread to other countries. Beijing, China is one of the most polluted cities due to smog. Paris is said to have more smog than any other European capitals.
Although it may not seem like it but limiting your car usage can really improve safety. Transportation is the second largest source of America's emmisions. Everyone knows that transportation is the method of getting from point A to point B.The environment is what gives you oxygen to breath everyday. If the environment is polluted with smog it can cause danger to your health. If you just leave your car for a moment take a walk breath some fresh air you will feel better. There is 70 percent of Vauban families that do not own cars. Heidrun Walter is one of those persons that do not own a car and he says "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way:" People can live happily without cars. In the end your safety is improved because you could be saving yourself from a future health risk.
Indeed if you use a car everyday to get to your destinations you really are'nt doing anything that gets you active. Just how you have a car there are also other methods for you to get to your destinations. You can ride your bike,ride buses,or walk to your destinations too. In the mid 1990's the day without cars began in Bogota. If you really think about it cities could be built in which "pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial, and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emmisions, and improve safety". This helps you to at least take a walk everyday and it would also stop the pollution to the environment.
Limiting your car usage can have great advantages. Sometimes youprobably just didn't realize it but those advantages could really have an effect in the waqy you live. There are advantages such as reducing smog, improving your safety, and getting you active. | 3 |
Technology is the biggest thing in our world today. Technology is everywhere, its in our homes, work, and school. Using technology in the classrooms has really help students. Dr. Huang has came up with a technology that helps read people's emotions by looking at their face. Using this technology in the classroom can really help students pay attention more, help them understand, and make the students have more fun in class. This technolgy would be valuable in the classroom.
Almost every student will get bored in class atleast once in their school career, and sometimes it is hard for teachers to know if their students are getting bored and not paying attention. Most schools today have computers or laptops, by using Dr. Huang's technology the teacher can use the technology to see if their students are paying attention. If the results come back good then the teacher can move on, if not the teacher might want to go back and make the lesson more fun.
School can be hard sometimes and might be hard for students to understand what the teacher is talking about. Using the technology teachers can have their students hop on a computer or laptop and see if they are understanding the lesson. Some students learn quicker than others so this would be a good way for teacher can see where all their students are at.
This technology could make school more fun. Students do not want to listen to their teacher talk all the time. So they can use this technology to help them in school. The technology can see if the student is confused, getting bored, or understanding the topic. If the student is confused the computer can make the lesson more easier, or if they are understanding it they can make the lesson more challenging. This could help students have more fun class too because they can use technology and using technology is always fun.
Dr. Huage's technology could really help students and teachers. The students would not be as bored and understand what the teacher is teaching. This could also help the teacher on how they need to teach the lesson. This technology would be valuable in the classroom. | 3 |
Dear Senator PROPER_NAME,
The purpose of this letter is to fight for the cause of removing the Electoral College and voting simply by popular vote. With eveidence from "What is the Electoral College?'' by the Office of the Federal Register, "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong" by Bradford Plumer, and "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President," by Richard A. Ponser, I will eleborate on this subject. Now, since I am only fourteen, I do not claim to have all knowledge and be an expert on this method of voting, but it is not the way to choose our country's leader.
The Electoral College is a compromise between who the people of America chose and who Congress has chosen. This is an incorrect method of selecting the President. The Constitution states that we the people have the choice to select our government; not Congress. Yes, the Constitution's founding fathers also established the Electoral College, but it is a thing of the past. As Richard A. Ponser writes, an "anchorism" (In Defense of the Electoral College, par. 1), if you will. Moreover, the Electoral College does not belong in this day and age; it is something that is out-dated and in need of replacement.
The Electoral College also does not allow citizens to exersize their right to vote for their President, since Congress also has their say in the matter. The voting process was created for the citizens; not the people who are in the government. In fact, Bradford Plumer states that "over 60% of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now." (The Indefensible Electoral College, par. 1) This process of voting for President is undesired and despised my many people, by over half of the voters in America. The Office of the Federal Register writes that the Electoral College is "a compromise between election of the President by a vote in congress and election of the President by popular vote of qualified citizens." Why does Congress have any sort of influence or say in this matter? The people choose their government; not the governemt itself!
Alright, the Electoral College is something that should not be used, by I can see the point of its purpose. The popular vote of the citizens can be infulenced by others, or advertisements and propoganda from political parties. Some voters are biased and overlook the negative things of the candidates because they do not wish to believe that this person does not support or believe everything they do. The Electoral College helps to balance that out. "No region... has enough electoral votes to elect a president." (In Defense of the Electoral College, par. 5) Richard A. Ponser asserts this in his article, as well as the fact that no region or place has any reason to go about "increasing his plurality" (par. 5) to make sure that a candidate will win. The Electoral College prevents this, resulting in a compromise between the popular vote of the citizens and Congress.
To come to a conclusion, I have stated that the Electoral College is not a method that should be used to choose the President of the United States. It is out-dated and does not allow citizens to choose the leader of their country. However, is balances out the popular vote and the Congress's vote.
Thank you for taking the time to read this letter.
Sincerely,
PROPER_NAME | 3 |
Boom the sound of ginourmous truck slamming into a house full of people , smoke everywere there's about to be a fire many people are unconcious or dead. More than half of the people in the house are rushed to the hospital. As you can see there has been an atrocious accident because of that vehicle. Their should definitley be a limiting of car usage because their would be less car accidents , people would be able to spend less money on cars and we would have less air pollution. Also having a car can cause a lot of stress or tension for people.
Obviously we're having a lot of problems with money in this world , if we limit car usage that would really help is us out a lot. See as it states in source one paragraph two '' A car-owner buys a space, for forty thousand dollars , along with a home.'' With those forty thousand dollars you can do a lot to help the world . It aslo says that fifty seven percent of the people who live in a suburban area sold their cars just move where they live at now. Who needs a car when you can just walk ''stores are placed a walk away, on a main street rather than the malls along some distant highway. ''source one paragraph 6.
Pollution is destroying our world and we need to help stop it, so here's an idea lets ban driving due to smog says Paris. Their was an enforced partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. Do you agree with that? well I do and here's why . Paris has more smog than other European capitals so if they don't stop the smog it's going to be horrific for their city. Source three paragraph twenty one '' the goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog.'''Not having cars for one day is brilliant idea because is an improvement to the city of Bogota.
Their is a lot of disruptions an accidents going on because of cars mainly because of the traffic so if their was less cars it would be more peaceful. Usually when there's traffic you hear a lot honking and there's a lot fines for that. The fines are very expensive to pay so you're wasting a lot of money. Also when people are honking they don't realize that other people are sleeping . Everyone needs sleep , some people can't sleep through everything so all it takes is one honk and bam they're awake. Sleeping is really needed in your life imagine notgetting enough sleep because of traffic well yeah that would suck an a lot of people already go through that .
So in conclusion what I'm saying is car usage should definitly be limited at least in some countries or states. Money is a really big problem we have that needs to be solved and this is a great way. People living in a surburan area have to pay more just for extra parking places. Air pollution is very bad for the world with les cars that will stop as well. Traffic is not good for the world either because it is stressful an it is not good for people to be stressed. | 3 |
The technology called the "Facial Action Coding System", or FACS, that enables computers to identify human emotions is a way to destroy the teacher's way of teaching because Dr. Huang quoted, "A Classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," and "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor". In this argument, if the computer can do such, then there is a high chances that the job to teach will be replaced. In an intellectual student's view, it is best to be taught directly from a human teacher since it has emotions, efforts, and its struggles.
There is also another reason why this technology isn't the best to teach. The author states that, "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication," notes Dr. Huang. "So computers need to understand that, too." It's only because then the teacher can't be that person who only teaches, it got their students as their great friends to talk, to trust, and to learn from them. Without teachers, then what do the computer teach? There is so many informations in a computer, yet the teacher teaches only one subjects. It's best to be taught by a teacher who can be your friend you trust and to learn, as well.
Another reason why it is not best to have FACS is because of this text that the author states, "For example, if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a smiliar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different." This is what is not great in the classroom. The students might not be entirely happy, or frown. They would be bored most of the time, and if that happens, an ad will try to make the students smile, which means it can leads to inappropiate ad such as pornography, online games, etc. It's a valid reason that FACS shouldn't be in the classroom, and isn't worth to have it.
Another reason that FACS shouldn't be accepted into the classroom is because the auther states this from the paragraph 6 about ads example. They can be a lot distracting if you're taking a test as well as quizzes. Ad changes based on your feelings, which means it would bring out games that makes you excited, and play that game, which will causes a huge amount of distractions in the classroom.
In conclusion, it is best not to bring a FACS to a classroom. You'll only get distractions from it. It's also recommended to be taught by a teacher since it can teach you one subjects you choose, and possibly makes you better than before. The emotions may be important, but in a teaching matter, a computer technology that can identify emotions isn't important at all. | 2 |
In the article "Unmasking the Face of Mars", a theory is presented to the readers, that alien life form could have caused the '"face on mars". There are diffrent reasons on why that image is there, besides "aliens" put it there. It could be butte mesa. Also cameras sent in space would have picked up on something unusual. Scientist don't present a theory unless they have evidence to back it up.
One reason that the "face on mars" is there, is butte mesa. Which is usually shadows that make it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. Butte mesa are found in West America, one example of the butte mesa is in Snake River Plain of Idaho. Which is a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa. The mesa located in Idaho is about the same height as the Face on Mars.
Another thing, is that cameras are sent into space to take pictures of planets and record everything that is found. Scientist enlarge the photos 3 times bigger, to see everthing within it. If there were anything in the picture that seemed unusual, the cameras would allow you to see it. Any objects, like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyrsmids. Even small shacks, you would be able to see it.
Thirdly, scientists don't present a theory unless they have gone threw precautions and looked over all of there evidence to support the theory. In the article it talks about how the scientists, sent two diffrent cameras up to make sure the clouds wren't the issue of what they saw. Also, they blew the images up to see if there was an objects. To make sure that nothing could endanger there theory, of it just being a butte mesa. If the scientists really didnt believe there theory was valed, they would'nt have taken so many precautions.
In conclusion, the "Face on Mars" is probably just a naturally occuring landform on Mars. With the evidence of the butte mesa in West America. The cameras going up and taking pictures more than once. Also, the scientists taking many precautions to prove that the "Face on Mars", is a butte mesa. The theory that the "Face on Mars", is just a naturally occuring landform, is highley likley. | 3 |
Driverless Cars
Driverless cars are the future. They are definietly coming and we all have to be mentally prepared. Cars are already getting driverless for some things now. They have cars that park themsleves and have drivers assist which are features that the car lets know when you about to hit something, about to drift into another lane, etc.
I am not surprised at all that some dealerships are starting to make driverless cars. My only question is... If they make driverless cars, what will the driver do or will there even be need for one?
There are many different types of assistants and they keep coming and creating new ones to help keep the driver safe and out of harms way. Soon they are going to have "Smart Cars" that wont need any help with driving at all. Some people are afraid of the future and "in most states it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars." Only certain states like California, Nevada, Florida, abd the District of Columbia are ready to test the cars and get them out there becasue they know that the future is coming and they want to be prepared for what will happen.
People think that this is going to be a huge controversy when it comes to accidents. As we know and understand America has many car accidents a year, but its the peoples fault when they do get into them. With driverless cars, would it be the person's fault or the car/ manufacturer's fault? These are just some of the pros and cons of having a driverless cars. Safety is a huge part in driving becasue the safer you feel the better the driver you will be.
"Automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems ahead will be solved. Tesla has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 percent of the time. Mercedes-Benz, Ausi, and Nissan plan to have cars drive themselves by 2020." See the future is coming. People just have to mentally prepare themselves for the next couple of years becasue if notthey wont be ready for the future. | 3 |
The Challenge of Exploring Venus
Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents because Striving a challenge presented by Venus has value. Not only because of the insight to be gain on the planet itself. Also human curiosity likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. Venus sometime called the "Evening Star," it is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky and yet Venus can sometime be our nearest option for a planetary visit.
One of the reason the author support the idea that studying venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers is Venus is one of the planets close to the Earth. In the text "Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus is more than three decades." This quote from the text show that landing in the Planet on Venus is very diffcult and challenge planet for human to study, despite its proximity to us.
Another reason is Many researcher are having Venus as challengers because scientists go through mission to understand Venus would go up close despite the risks. Inthe text it stated "Or maybe we should think of them as challenges. Many researchers are working o innovation that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus." This mean that many scientist on the Earth will risk and take challenge to get and learn more about the venus and that it is worthy it to pursuit despite the dangers it presents.
My last reason why the author supports the idean that studying Venus is worthy persuit despite the dangers is that the National Aeronautics and space Administration NASA has compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. Venus allow scientists to float above the fray.One of the example is "...a vehicle over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by standing up and out of their way." This shown that Venus are not bad as far as I know from the article because it allow scientist from the NASA working on studying on to Venus.
In conclusion Venus has a value. In the planet itself human are curiosity lead human into many equally intimidating endeavors. The article shown that many researcher includinding the scientist are making a mission both safe and scientifically productive. As we know the Solar power would be plentiful and radiation would not exceed Earth level and it is not easy for survivable for human. | 2 |
Being a Seagoing Cowboy is a big honor. You should join the Seagoing Cowboys program because you get to help animals, you can vist many places, you learn responsibility, and you get to have fun on board after the animals are uploaded.
I know this becasue in the text it says UNRRA hired "Seagoing Cowboys" to take care of the horses, young cows, and the mules that were shipped overseas. Another reason is in paragraph 9 it says Being a Seagoing Cowboy was much more than an adventure for Luke Bomberger. It opened up the world to him. "I'm grtaeful for the opportunity," he says. "It made me more aware of people of other countries and their needs." And that awarness stayed with him, leading his family to host a number of international students and exchange visitors for many years.
Those are some resons to join the Seagoing Cowboys. You get to help animals, you vist new places, and you learn responsibility. That is why you should consider joining the Seagoing Cowboys. | 1 |
In this article "making Mona Lisa Smile", it talks about a computer technology that can tell your emotions. Having a computer be able to tell your emotions would be pretty interesting right? Or would it just be creepy? If we fully develop computer programs that can tell our emotions and make something interesting based on our emotions like it states in paragraph 6. If the lesson we are learning in school changed based on our emotions do you think students would learn more? I do.
If we had lessons in school based on our emotions and how we felt about the subject; the computer could reconize if we were into the lesson or not. If we could have this technology and our lessons changed in a way that could make students want to learn a subject that on a daily basis made them want to fall asleep in the class or they just could not find a way to get themselves interested, the computer could change that for them. This technology could be very useful for our upcoming generations. People already know that we are slowly going to become more of a digital world so if we had these programs set up for kids to go their own pace and learn things that intrest them we could have shorter school days and more time for children to be kids and have fun in their life.
There is a large population of students who choose not to come to school every day because school makes them unhappy or they just hate some of their classes because they know the job they want when they are older not everything they are learning is going to be needed in the outside world. If this technology could help us show what emotions we had towards different subjects then maybe it would help teachers understand how to teach their students the information in a way it wont go in one ear and out the other.
There are going to be people who disagree with this new technology becoming part of life, because they might not want the technology we have now. There will always be someone who is not happy with the way life around them is going because of technology and sometimes technology does fail us. Technology can shut down. Technology can make things we have worked hard for disappear in one second and we won't have all of our hard work anymore so what was once hard work in a second can become wasteful material.
Although there are people who are going to disagree with this technology and maybe spread rumors that it is faulty, we need this technology to help us better understand the world around us. Say a cop was trying to figure out a murder or suicide, if we had the technology to figure out what emotions they show it could tell us if they were murdered or if they commited suicide. This technology could really help us advance in life and learn how to understand things from new perspective.
This technology could be believed to improve our society and the way we learn, the way we educate our children, and the way we have an output on life itself. This technology could be a new meaning for life. It could make students learn to lie school. It could help us understand what is going on in someones life. It could maybe even help us solve crimes. Of course there is going to be people who will fight against this new technology but if we stick to it one day the technology can help us understand why these people are against it. | 4 |
Wouldnt it be great to hear that Just by citizens limiting car usage they are kind of making the world a better place? Instead of driving from place to place, they at the park, or taking a nice walk around town, or maybe even having a little fun ice skating. Its exciting to hear by just walking anywhere instead of taking a car or a motor vehicle, you are making the enviroment better. Also who doesn't love less traffic in the streets? Limiting car usage has so many advantages, you maybe just have to get out of your car to see it. Imagine walking down the street and hearing the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drown out the occasional sound of a distant motor.
In Vauban Germany, most streets are completely car free. Heidrun Walter said "when i had a car i was always tense. Im much happier this way." Passenger cars are responsible for twelve percent of greenhouse gas emissions in europe, and fifty percent in some car intensive areas in the Untied States. Polution is a huge problem, not only for us but for the enviroment. Just by limiting cars,you can reduce gas emissions. In the the passage it says that in the untied states, the enviromental protection agency is promoting "car reduced" communites, and legislators are starting to act, if cautiously.
Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. Almost four thousand drivers were fined, and they also had thier cars impounded due to some of thier reactions to the fine. large traffic went down in the capital of france after five days of intensifying smog. In the passage it says that cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emissions. They blamed deisel fuel because france has a tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline. All these car fumes and bad polution can cause many dangers and car usage has a big part in this problem. By limiting car usage, the smog in paris cleared enough on monday for the ruling french party to rescined the ban for odd numbered plates on Tuesday.
In another place, Bogota Colombia, it was the third straight year cars have been banned with only busses and taxis permitted for the day without cars in this capital city of seven million. They did this so they can reduce smog. The people who didnt follow the rules while this day was in progress, they faced twenty five dollor fines. this day can do good for many people and can give you many opportunitys that you havent got to do before. In the passage a businessman named carlos arturo plaza said "it's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air polution." he said that while riding a two seat bicycle with his wife. the usage of cars is not always need, having a little fun wont hurt, taking a walk, going to the park is always a good thing. Even if it rains, that wont stop the people from participating in this day.
Car usage isnt the worst thing in the world but there are many advantages when you dont use them. Polution decreases, as well as smog. you have a day to enjoy the outside world. while you do that think of the gas emmisons you arent putting in the enviroment. People dont really notice it but polution has a big effect to global warming. Just by limiting your car usage, you can be doing a favor not only to you but the enviroment and the world. Now isnt that great to hear? | 3 |
In the article the narriator states "the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times." Even with a human drive. We still wreck. No matter how smart cars get, their will always be accidents. It a way of life. I think that we shoudnt have driverless cars. I think that will just cause a bigger problem to the problems that we already have now.
Technology has gliches all the time. People hack into things all the time. I think that if we get cars that drive themself that people will evenutally find a way to hack into them and cause them to wreck or cause them to go somwhere that their not supposted to go. If your going on a logn road trip and your car is driving its self and dosent need any of your assisance. Your proabably going to fall asleep. Once your asleep yo dont know whats going on and your car can take you somewhere that you never palnned to go. It only takes one person to hack into a car and take it where its not supposted to go before mroe and more people start to do it. It cousd increase murders and kidnappings. Especially if its a young teenage girl in the car. I think that their could be some really bad outcomes of that.
If cars start to drive them self. What if the internet goes down one day. Or maybe the power goes out. What are you to do then? I think that technology is taking over the world as we know it.
Someday something bad is going to happen because of that. Weither we realize it or not now. it will eventually happen now. Everyone is so attatched to the cell phones and the internet. They cant go a day without it.
I think that insted of trying to think of ways to make cars smarter. We should think of ways to make cars better for the enviroment. We should be thinkign of wasy to make this earth that we live on cleaner and healtier for otu kinds and people in the future to live on. Make it last a lot longer than it will if we keep destroying it with all this toxic and poisiness agees that keep killign it. Landfills are getting bigger everyday and out population keeps expanding. Evenutally were gonna run outta room and were nto goign to have enough good soil to plant on anymore. Were gonna have to make somebigger changes if we want this earth to last and makign care drive them self isnt one od them. Thats just stupid. If your lazy enough to not want to drive yourself around than you shoudl be driving. But thats just the way that i think. Thats just my opinion. Out of billions in the would its just one. | 2 |
NASA received a photo from Viking 1, in 1976, and it appeared to be a face. In 1998, a higher resolution picture came in and in 2001 an even higher resolution picture came in. NASA scientist thought aliens created this. But they didn't it was just a Martian mesa. A few days after they figured out it was a Martian mesa, NASA unveiled the image for all to see. The caption on it noted a "huge rock formation... which resembles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes,nose,and mouth." Authors reasoned it would be a good way to engage the public and attract attention to Mars. And it certainly did! The
"Face on Mars" has since become a pop icon. It starred in a Hollywood film, appears in books, magazines, radio talkshows- even haunted grocery store checkout lines for 25 years! The picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa. The "Face on Mars" wasn't an actually face. It was only a Martian mesa. If scientist actually proved aliens are real I'm sure they won't tell the public. | 0 |
Participating in the Seagoing Cowboys program was one of my best choices of my life. Being a Seagoing Cowboy has times where you needed to be serious and take your work seriously, but it also has times where you could have a lot of fun. There were many things that you can do when you become a Seagoing Cowboy. You could help take care of animals, serve as a night watchman, etc. There were many things you could have done if you dont like one of the jobs, there is so many new things to experience!
After working, the guys and I would play baseball and volleyball games. A good way to just relaxand take it easy after working hard. Others even sometimes had table-tenis tournaments, fencing, reading, games, whittling, and even boxing! The activities were fun and helped pass time. The games were just a way to let loose for a while. Anyone is bound to have fun!
I also learned a few things in my time of being a Seagoing Cowboy. For instance, being a Seagoing Cowboy helped me become more aware of the people in other countries and their needs. Many people out there are struggling to do things for themselves, and their country. So help out! Whenever you get an opertunity to help someone you should take it. It's a great way to help out. Think about what it could do for you, and other people! Don't let this amazing opertunity slip through your fingers. Become a Seagoing Cowboy today! I promise, you won't regret it. | 2 |
I am against the development of driverless cars but not against the technology. The technology is efficent but having a driverless car is dangerous. They say though in the article that safety is their biggest concern. With a driverless car it may cause the human driver to become lazy and rely on the car. Will it be the driver or manufactuer to blame if the technology is failing the car?
Safety is a concern to everyone who would be present in the driverless car. The smart car will need to have an alert driver. If that does not happen and there is a crash, who will be the blame? There should be a cover liability law that comes into place before smart cars can roam. It will not be easier if there are drivers who are not paying attention and slack.
People will start to rely on cars and technology than to do their jobs. When it is there job to protect and ensure safety for all passengers. Soon they will forget how to manually do things, how will they learn if they are surrounded by technology? If the power goes out will they even know how to drive? The car industries will drop because of the production of easier and lazier ways to be transported.
If the car crashes or there is a mishap who will be to blame? The driver will argue that the technology is mest up or the manufactuer had a glitch. The driverless car might not see an animal or a pedestrian and they could get hurt. There would be no driver paying enough attention that could save a life. In the article it says, "Presently, traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times." That law is enforced and should be followed with a smart car.
Most of the laws want to keep everyone safe, with the new technology would it be easier or harder? We may have no control if the technology malfunctions. It is efficent but it can be harmful if there is no control. We do not want people to slack and rely on something else. It would either be the driver or manufactuer to take the fault if something goes wrong. I am against the development of driverless cars. | 2 |
In this article it asks if you can imagine a world where cars are not needed, I am proud to say I can. In American now more than ever transportation is needed mainly for people to get to work and buy food or other appliances. The people in the word are in need of public transportation more than ever. This is why I believe we need to invest in building public infrastructure, public cars, and other forms of transportation.
I would say the best way to create such a project is to create road systems controlled by magnates and gps computers and creating cars that will run on similar to a train track. This is similar to the bullet trains seen throughout Japan that run on magnates. It would also need to be run by some form of renewable energy sources so the best option is electricity and solar power. It would need a computer capable of driving a car in all conditions and that can travel at high speeds.
Would also need a safety feature that allows the driver to take control of the vehicle. these systems are put in place people will be able to travel long distances in a short period of time with little to no cost.
Now some will ask "how will you pay for such a large project?" And I will respond with "It's complicated...". I believe the government should be involved in building this form of public transportation. The way I invision us paying for this is and expansion on estate tax. the estate tax is a tax on a persons inheritance over 10 million dollars and in America this is set at around 40%. This means someone who inherited 10 million and one dollars would pay a tax of 40¢. If we expand on this tax and other taxes similar to this we could no only fund our expansion on public infrastructure but also pay for other extraordinary things such as tuition free college education. I would also say that companies that want to advance this milestones in engineering can help in the innovation process. I believe that these companies are import in the completion aspect and are needed to enhance the innovation. I'm not saying the government should souly control the means of production of thes automated vehicles it is just practical that it be envolved in the production.
To recap my belief is that America needs to evolve. The people are in need of better public transportation and infrastructure. If we can create vehicles that can transport people at high speed and wove our transportation issues in America. We can pay for it and create with the help of tax payer dollars and companies willing to work with the government. If we follow the basic outline put forward and expand upon it we can achieve many things and creat many things the people of America and the world need. | 1 |
I am against the development of these cars because those who own one would never know if the the car would stop working and will crash. Also waiting fo the driver to take its part too when driving, Although having a driverless car would be dangerouse to those who own one and the community.
Having a driverless cars would be a good idea but can cause an acciendent. In the text, it states that, "Still, even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover libability in the case of an accident." If those who owns a driverless car got into a acciendent the new law would have to order to cover the damage. Also by having a diverless car, if the car have stop functioning well, it would cause someone to get injured. An example from the text is, "If tecnology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-the driver or the manufacturer." Having that car, those wouldn't know who to blame. Driverless cars can cause problems so it wouldn't be a good idea owning one.
Those who are thinking or has a driverless car can get into problems that they aren' aware of. Those people can cause an accident and can be dangerous to those around them and themselves. | 1 |
Luke Bomberger was a man who worked for a seagoing company thats a person who goes over seas during World War ll to help people and there towns , and citys.
He was in a program called Seagoing Cowboys. In the story are reasons to join the program here are some. You can travel the world and go to places that you have never been. You will travel in the oceans like the Alantic and Pacific. While you do this job if you like animals this would be a good job for you because Luke had to check on the animals every hour so u could sign up for that part .Luke's claim was that being a Seagoing Cowboy was much more than an job. I know this because the passage says that Seagoing was much more than an adventure " it opened up the world to him".
In all Luke Bomberger was a man who thought that that Seagoing was a lifetime opportunity and loved it. | 1 |
I'm more for the driverless cars than against it. Although there will never be a fully driverless car because you'll always need a person to tell it where it's going, or etc, I like the idea of it. It could help us so much more in the long run.
Driverless cars could prove that we're moving into the future. We could be saving ourselves money from digging underground to find fuel. The new driverless cars could be electric, therefore, making us able to completely discontinue looking for fuel. We could also be making the world safer by having an alert system for if the human driver gets distracted while driving. They also mentioned having a touch sensor on the wheel to make sure the human driver is paying attention. Driverless cars could be a step into the future for everyone.
Driverless cars can have their bad sides, but it's nothing that can't be fixed overtime. Look how far we've gotten already. I think driverless cars are a great idea and we should continue the good work. | 1 |
Using cars for everyday life in cities and towns is a normal, everyday event people do for their carrers and personal lives. In bigger cities, a pollution problem has been mostly caused by the cars, because of the immense ammount of them being used everyday.
Some cities around the world have commited to the car-ban and the outcome has been on the postitive close to every time. Opening stores in a walking ditance, instead of malls on distant highways. The advantages are not just for you, they are to the whole city or town you may live in. The exercise and the people chating about on the streets with a clean air and no conjested roads to worry about. Since the peak of driving in 2005, the cars on the road and the amount of lisences have declined. The make of this is once again positive.
Cars on the road can change in your area if a large amount of people strive to do so. This could be a new generation of how transportation evolves for years to come when we are biking, walking, or just strolling around stores walking distince from you! | 1 |
'Space. The final frontier.' This is a very commonly used phrase that is the helm for space exploration. Since the beginning of time, humans have looked up to the sky and wondered what might be in that vast place above their heads. The problem is, there is simply no technology advanced enough for scientists to explore all that lies around them. In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author definitely states the challenges of exploring the planet, but does not effectively support their claim that it is worth the risk.
The author presents the challenge of Venus's inhospitable environment in relation to the Earth by simply laying down the facts, without defending their side. In paragraph two of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the text states, "Each previous mission [to Venus] was unmanned...since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours." The author gives an explanation to the quick deaths of these spacecrafts as well, clearly outlining how hostile the environment is. "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon blankets Venus...the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." The author goes on to list more negative attributes, such as the temperature, which averages "over 800 degrees Fahrenheit...the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system." It seems, so far, that the risks definitely outweigh the rewards. The author then describes technology that would help scientists explore Venus, but it is clear that this tech has not yet been developed.
The author mentions "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus" which is that "scientists [would] float above the fray." The problem with this statement is that the technology has obviously not been tested yet, and very likely not even developed. The author's use of an uncertain word, "possible", connotes uncertainty and doubt that this idea will even work. The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" then proceeds to counter their own argument in the next paragraph: "However, peering at Venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet can only provide limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere". In addition to listing yet another drawback of the environment, the author blatantly states that the previously mentioned idea would not work for proper exploration of Venus. The author is simply relying on the reader's emotions and assumed interest in space to agree with the author, rather than presenting facts to back up their argument.
"The Challenge of Exploring Venus" does give a couple good reasons for exploring Venus: initially, the fact that it was once the most Earthlike planet. "Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth." The author then goes on to describe these features: valleys, mountains and craters. Another reason is given: "Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration...the value of returning to Venus seems indisputable, but what are the options for making such a mission both safe and scientifically productive?" It is assumed that the author ends this sound claim with a statement to pique interest, but it does just the opposite. The use of an interrogative relays to the reader that even the author, who is arguing for space exploration, is uncertain how these explorations will be accomplished; this effectively discredits the validity of their statement. The author relies too much on objectiveness to get their point across, and that is how they fail: to propose a strong argument, one must back up their claims with facts to persuade readers, not simply state facts in relation to the negatives of a situation without refuting them.
In conclusion, the author presents a weak argument that is backed up by unfinished projects and an assumed advocacy for space exploration. Rather than give the cold, hard facts of opposition and counter them with more facts that support their argument, the author gives no definitive research on how scientists will go about exploring Venus. The author simply states ideas, accepting them as sound solutions to any problem that space may throw at them. The vast unknown is not something to toy lightly with, lives and multitudes of financing are in the balance. There is no room for possible ideas, one must know with proof that these inklings of imagination will be sustainable when put to the test. Space may be the final frontier, but this argument persuades readers to believe that time is yet to come. | 5 |
The challenge of exploring Venus showed a great amount of evidence to support both opinions, supportive of the idea or not. As we lnow venus is 170 degrees on the surface but ships can take it. Then theres the fact that no spacecrafts sent by humans has ever lasted more than a few hours on the surface of venus.
there is a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets on venus, and even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in venus's atmospher.
Venus distance wise is a time consuming yet possible feet. Venus and mars are the closest neighboring plants to us and Venus more than mars shows there could have been life long ago on this planet. Venus consists of valleys, mountian ranges, craters , and many believe oceans once inhabited this planet. Talks of NASA doing a human ran investigation thirty miles aboves venus to do reaserch.
NASA belives that Venus has not easy condistions but survivable for humans. There has been talks of even sending people down there to do research in the future and that could go bad knowing the knowledge you have on this planet. the challenges would be very intimidating and unpredictable.
In the end these talks on further exploring Venus is very intresting and inthink is should be done at the right place and the right time. Us as humans are curious creatures and should have all the knowledge we can gather on these forigne planets before human exploration. A lot of questions un answered and a lot to answer. | 1 |
Some cities are making themselves car-free. Like in Vauban, Germany; Paris; Bogota, Colombia; and even the president of the United States is trying to "curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions" (Rosenthal, Paragraph 29). In Vauban, Germany residents of a community are "going where few soccer moms or commuting executives have ever gone before: the have given up their cars" (Rosenthal, Paragraph 1).Some advantages of limiting car usage is people are happier without cars and it promotes the alternative transportation and reduce smog.
The first advantage of limiting car usage is that people are happier without cars. "The day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in Bogota in the mid-1990s. It has seen the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths, the most of any Latin American city, according to Mockus, the city's mayor" (Selsky, Paragraph 27). "As a result, 70 pecent of Vauban's families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold a car to move here. "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way,"" (Rosenthal, Paragraph 3). "It was the third straight year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis permitted for the Day Without cars in this capital city of 7 million" (Selsky, Paragraph 21). "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, as a component of a movement called "smart planning""(Rosenthal, Paragraph 4). Finally "the rise in cellphones and car-pooling apps has facilitated more flexible commuting arrangements, including the evolution of shared van services for getting to work" (Rosenthal, Paragraph 35).
The second advantage of limiting car usage is that it promotes the alternative transportation and it reduces smog. "After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city"(Duffer, Paragraph 10). "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog . . . [The smog] rivaled Beijing, China, which is known os one of the most polluted cities in the world" (Duffer, Paragraph 14). "millions of colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during a car-free day yesterday, leaving the streets of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams" (Selsky, Paragraph 20). Also "the number of miles driven in the United States peaked in 2005 and dropped speadily thereafter.... 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" (Rosenthal, Paragraph 32). And "people who stopped car commuting as a result of the recession mat find less reason to resum the habit" (Rosenthal,Paragraph 36). But finally "Mine (19 and 21) have not botheres to get a driver's license, even though they both live in places where one could come in handy. They organize their summer jobs and social life around where they can walk or take public transportation or car-pool with friends" (Rosenthal, Paragraph 39).
And those are the reasons why some cities are making themselves car-free. People are a lot more happy with no cars as said from Elisabeth Rosenthal ""When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way". And also because people are trying to promote the alternative transportation and reduce smog, thats why Paris "enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city" (Duffer, Paragraph 10). So what do you think should citites ban driving? | 1 |
The author tells us how hard and difficult it is to land or even study venus because its so hard to land on or get close to because of all the dangerous things that can happen.
venus is a very worthy planet to study because nobody has ever been on it to know if there is any kind of life ont hat planet , or if plants can grow or anything. because its the closest planet to earth but the hardest to land on.
because venus really used to be covered with oceans and etc just like earth and nobody can really tell what it looks like now theres just alot of curocity. a bunch of people wondering what it looks like.
but venus is covered with a thick atmosphere of almost 97% carbon dioxide blankets. But its even more challenging with the clouds and highly corrosive sulfuric acid.
But on the surface of venus temperatures average around 800 degrees fahrenheit , and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet.
venus is a hard planet to study but it is very worth it. Becayse there are alot of things you can descover about venus and alot of people that would love to know whats really on venus. | 1 |
Can Driverless Cars Truly Be Driverless?
Driverless cars throw people off because how could a car be driverless when the driver still has to be paying attention to the road? The driver has to be prepared at all times to be ready to take over the wheel. Drivers can not fully rely on driverless cars because drivers have to pay attention to the road at all times, drivers are trusting a computer with their life, and the dangers of bordem behind the wheel.
Drivers have to pay attention to the road at all times, even if the "driverless" car is driving. The driverless car can not drive through work zones or around accidents, so the driver has to take control. The driver has to stay alert and ready for anything to come their way. The Google car announces when the driver should be ready to take control, but shouldn't a driverless car be able to drive on it's own? Eventhough the car can drive itself, the driver is still in position like they're going to drive too.
Drivers are trusting a computer based opperator with their life. What if the car was to get in an accident? Whose fault would it be? Drivers can't fully trust a computer to drive their car because they computer could mess up, and could cause an accident. What if a kid were riding a bike, and were to suddenly fall into the street and the driverless car did not read it? That would cause a big uproar for driverless cars. They are not proven to be 100% safe for the world around us.
The dangers of bordem of not driving could be very serious as well. The driver has to pay attention to the road at all times, but they are not driving. This could cause serious bordem, and could lead to falling asleep behind the wheel. At least when driving is occoured the driver has something to do.
Now a driverless car is not a bad idea. The text says that driverless cars use half the fuel that cars use today, and that driverless cars have driven half a million miles without a crash. Driverless cars could be the future, but there would still need to be a lot of work done to the cars to make sure they are completely safe for drivers. Instally cameras in the car would also help with teenagers, and some adults to not be behind the wheel on their phone, which could lead to less accidents. So, driverless cars are a good thing that could come into society.
Driverless cars sound dangerous right now, but as technology advances, they could help in the future. As of right now, driverless cars not be fully relied on because drivers still have to pay attention to the road, computers can crash, and the dangers of falling asleep behind the wheel could be dangerous. Driverless cars are not ready to be on the roads yet. | 3 |
Dear Mr. Senate,
The Electoral college method is not a very good system. The avrage American probably doesnt know that they are voting for slates insted of the president. This is why we should change it to popular votes. Everything would be so much easier and we would have a clear answer on who won and who was our president.
When we The people vote we dont want to vote for slates. We dont wsnt to put our trust into someone who we have never met into voting for the person we want. We want to vote clearly for who we want. Over 60% pf the people would prefer a direct election over the type of election that we have today.
The way we select who is president now is unfair. With the winner take all system the candidates dont spend much time in states they know they wont win in. This is why we need to change the system. I ask you for the people change this unfair system. | 1 |
T
he state Senator of Florida, lets try and keep the electoral college. These are the facts that willmake want to vote against the popularity vote for presdency. The big states (large population count)of the United States will have an overruling vote against smaller states(lower count of population), some states big state will convince other states to get one of their senators to party up, and the disputes that will occure of the sharing of population vote.
O
ne of the first problem will occur is the large population states(California, Texas, and Florida, New York, Ohio, Pensilvannia)will have overruling vote on small population states. In source 3 paragraph 4 says,"Large states get more attention from presidential canidates in a campaign than a small state does." This means that large states ingulf all of the attention from smaller population states. Later will be a growing concern for the Electoral College.
A
nother problem eould be that large population states will convience smaller population state to help them in the vote for a presidentional race AKA swing states. This winner takes all voting style will effect the people of the swing state and the real verdict the people want or what s best for the state.
I n 2002 a dispute rang out over the winning canidate's share of the Electoral invariety rexceeded his share of the populariy vote. It is impossible to get a tie in Electoral college ,so you will always find who will president. One problem would be the landslide that will occur rarely.
T
hese would be major problems that will occur and it will be delt with of the populariity vote for presideny and how Electoral college should be kept in the United states Goverment. | 2 |
I believe the Electoral College is the best way to pick the President of the united states. The Electoral college is a proccess in which the founding fathers created as a compromie.
The compromise was between election of the President by congress and election by popular vote which was done by citizens. The Electoral college consists of 538 electors. 270 votesd are required in order to have the president win by majority vote. The number of votes your state is allowed depends on the number of members in its Congressional delegation.
According to the Office of the Federal Register. "Each candidate running for President in your state has his or her own group of electors". "The electors are generally chosen by the candidates political party".
The election is usually held every four years on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. Most of the states have a system where the "winner-take-all". Which awards the winner of the presidential candidate.
In conclusion, The Electoral Election is the best way to pick the president. | 0 |
If you are thinking about joining the Seagoing Cowboys program, I would highly recomend it. I am Luke Bomberger and I was a former sea cowboy. Being a sea cowboy is a great experence for any type of young man. You use all types of skills like taking care of animals, sailing techneces, and even your athletic side gets used.
You get to explore the world and its uneqe sites like Europe, China, Greece, Venice, and more! I had many advencures away from the ship as well as on the ship. Once I toured an excavated castle in Crete. I also saw the Panama Canal on the way to China and took a gondola ride in the watery city of Venice!
You get keeped working hard cleaning and taking care of the animals but you also get a whole lot of fun! Two weeks may seem like a long time at sea but there are many things that make time fly by! When the animals are getting unloaded you can play games like baseball and vollyball in the empty holds where the animals are being housed. There is also many other games like fencing, reading, boxing, and table-tennis to make the time go faster. The opportunity has made me aware of the suffering and hardships in other countrys. Why can't it do the same for you?
This opportunity is not all fun though. Once on one of my16 trips there where 335 horses and the hay and oats to feed them. All of the animals need to be watered 2 or 3 times a day so you can not get lazy! Stall have to be cleaned too!
If you get a great opportunity like this, do not back down! It may be an advencure just waiting to happen!
Show the people in need that you do care for them! | 2 |
Have you seen the Face on Mars? It was twenty five years ago when NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft was circling Mars and snapped a photo of a landform that looked much like a human face. We, NASA, have noticed many people made conspiracy theories about the Face being made by aliens. We assure you this is not true. NASA wishes that there was an acient civilization on Mars that constructed the Face. The Face is a natural landform.
The Face is not an alien monument. Eighteen long years after the first mission and the first photograph was taken, Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) arrived at the Red Planet in September, 1997. Chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program, Jim Garvin explained that we felt this was important to taxpayers, so we photographed the Face as soon as we could get a good shot at it. On April 5, 1998, MGS finally flew over the Face and snapped a photo ten times shaper than the orginal. This photo revealed a natural landform. If aliens did create the Face, there would be other clearer signs of alien work. For example, there would be huts, small shack figures or even Egyptain-style pyramids. Therefore, there was no alien monument after all, but not everyone was satisfied, so in 2001, NASA got another photo of it, much clearer and closer this time. It was still just a natural landform.
NASA went through a lot to get the three photos of the Face. The first one in 1976, the second in 1998, and the third in 2001. These three photos have shown everyone very clearly that the Face on Mars is a natural landform. Some even say it reminds then of a butte or mesa, landforms common around the American West. In conclusion, the Face on Mars is, in fact, a natural landform. | 2 |
Let me tell you about my life i am a young kid who just grauated from high school who didnt think my life would change this quick. I work two part time jobs trying to make money. The first job i was at was the grocery store. The second job i was at was the bank.
The Seagoing Cowboys program is a program that takes care of horses,young cows and mules. This program giving people lots of good opportunitys in life. If you joined this program u could do lots of differents. You would not just do one thing all the time.
When you are on board you can have lots of things to do its not always boring. After all the aniamls have unloaded u can can play lots of games. Like for an example the cowboys played baseball and volleyball. There all way more fun things to do then that.
Think of all the different place they went. For an example they went to Europe,China and Italy. In all those diffrent place they went to it wasnt just a boring trip. Like when they in Italy they got to take a gondola ride.
In conclusion,there are lots of reasons why you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program. Just dont join because u were ask to. They give you lots of opportunity in life that you many never get in life. If you join is program im sure you wont be let down. | 1 |
The author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers because long ago Venus was once like Earth. In the text it states "Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." The author may not be the only one that thinks studying Venus isn't a bad idea because Astronomers are fascinated by it.
Now there is quite a bit of danger when it comes down to studying Venus.
The temperature gets really hot on Venus. In the text it states " On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." That can not be good for the human body. Venus has a thick atmosphere of carbon dioxide blankets and sulfuric acid clouds.
Also, in the text it states "such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals." I don't know how good of idea this could be because according to the passage " ...no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades." Now just imagine what it would do to a human without the proper gear on.
Than, again they might think it's a good idea to see if their is ife outside of Earth. This could possibly happen in the near future. I don't think the scientists or the author care about the danger that could possibly happen. In the text it 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.
In conclusion, studying Venus is a huge risk. It could possibly take years or decades until a decision is made, or until the proper equipment is invented. Either way studying Venus has its cons and pros. | 2 |
My position on the driverless cars are dumb if you ask me. Because what some people can't afford this car of if it gets stolen. Who is going to get the car back do you any kind of protection and if you car has a malfuction it's not going to be so great. You could die be in the hospitial with major issues going on and the car dealer is not going to care. But if that doesn't happen the gas price's will go up the car might last longer but the gas would go up.
In paragraph 1 it talks about the google cofounder Sergey Brin says "The cars i foresees would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus". "He also believes such cars would fundamentally change the world". Then the 2 paragraph is talking about how driverless cars on movies and television. Have long been fascinated by the driverless cars but in reality the cars have people in them and there in case something does go bad. And if anything they would propbably call emergency people to go help them .
The good thing is they have tried this driverless car thing before and it kind of worked out in the "1980's automakers used speed sensors at the wheels in the creation of antilock brakes". That basically meant that there were locks on the tires so if the driver was going to fast airlocks would protect him or if he was about to hit something. | 0 |
I think electoral college is a terrible idea. I will be giving some of the reasons why i think this "process" is a horrible thing to do. By the end of my essay i hope you will agree with me that electoral college is a waste of time.
Electoral college is a "non-domocratic" way for electing a new president. I personally think that we should count peoples votes and not decide by the majority of the state. I say this because its unfair to the people who voted for the President that didnt get elected because the majority of the state voted for the other president.
Although if most of the state voted for a President that President is guaranteed that he got most of the peoples votes. Another thing that's unfair is that California has more electoral votes than Texas however, there is a chance that Texas is more populated than California. So if the votes were counted by person instead of state there would be a better chance of the President you voted for win the election.
So these are just a few of the reasons why I think electoral college is basically just a huge waste of time and why its unfair to the states with a lower number of electoral votes. Hopefully they will start to count votes in a regular way instead of giving each state a certain number of electoral votes. | 1 |
This program sounds really fun and you should join. Thats what im talking about in my story to day. I hope after this you consider joining.
One reason I think you should join is it would be a fun experience. You would be able to sightsee while your on the boat. You would get to play games on the boat to pass by time. Most important of all you get to help people and that should make you happy. Thats why I think it would be a fun experince.
Another reason I think you should join is that its a lifetime oppotunity. You to go to war and save people save our country and would make me smile. You get go on an adventure of a once lifetime and tell me that wouldn't be fun. You also get to serve our country and that is awesome. That why I think it is a lifetime opputunity.
The last reason is you get to go on a lot of adventures. You get to go places you never been before. You probably will go to the U.K alot. Same for the alantic ocean you will probablay be on it alot. Thats why I think adventures would be fun.
Thats my reason and ideas why I think you should come join us at the program. I hope this made up your mind about coming. Alright I'll see you if you come. | 2 |
"The cattle-boat trips were an unbelieveable opportunity for a small-town boy," he says. "Besides helping people, I had the side benifit of seeing Europe and China. But seeing the Acropolis in Greece was special,"
Luke had a great time going to take the cattle across water. Luke had the opprotunity to see China, Europe, taking a gondola ride, and even toured an excavated castle in Crete, then marveled at the Panama Canal. Luke was lucky to be able to get that job. People interested in joining that program shuld go out there and try to get it. There are seven good reasons people should join that area of job vacinity. One good reason is it will be fun because you could get to see some things you have always wanted to see and you could go places you have never been before.
The second reason you should join is its for an extremely good cause because it helps animals get where they need to go. Another reason people should join is because you could inspire people to do good for the world like start someting new. The fourth reason people should join is they could get an adventure out of it like luke and traveling to Crete to see an excavated castle. The fifth reason people could join is that. The sixth reason is it could start a chain of good things people do for each other. The final reason people should join is it could make people aware about other countries needs and their people.
People should join because it can help the earth them and everyone else. Luke didnt join because he knew he would get more money he joined because "He couldn't say no. He knew it was an opprotunity of a lifetime."
"Im grateful for the opprotunity," he says. "It made me more aware of people of other countries and their needs." Luke had a great opprotunity and he took it that made him get a better start in life thats another reason people should attempt to get the job when its offered. The job may or may not help them in life but it might help somebody else who knows maybe it will start a chain of good deeds.
In conclusion this could help people get a good start on life and get a start in their country. People should join becaus eanimals need their help- to get across water. Th eting their doing is for a really good cause they are trying to help animals so they basically arent put in confined
spaces. People would do that job because they would want to help animals, the enviornment, and even people and their countries. This gives people the chance to get to work better and get out of working at a grocery store.
Everyone should get out there and join. It
helps everythin and everyone. | 1 |
In the world today people are coming up with new ways to do things such as having driverless cars. This is good because we know we can do things with technology we never could years ago. This can be bad because this can tell us that technology is over ruling us, but thats not the case now.
Driverless car can be a bad idea because looking at technolog these days, it does alway work properly and that could lead to the cars. if some wrecks another car that would mean that it would be the cars fault but all the blame would be one the "driver". No one would know how it happened properly because there would be indication on how it happened.
Another reason why this would be a bad reason to have drverless cars was that the speed would be the same for everyone and some people may be in a hurry to get to places and the cars would take only the main roads to get to their destination. If the car wasn't used right it would mean that many people would be in danger to reckless people in the world.
The last problem with this kind of car would be when the person in the driver seat won't pay attention to the road and they get hurt for it. Many people in the world would be get hurt because they aren't doing anything and think that they would be perfectly safe and they won't.
In conclustion, the world would be a safer place if we didn't have driverless cars. This would lead to fewer injuries, problems, and misusage of the cars. If we just stay the same we can have less problems as well. So before we start thinking about having anything relative to these driverless car we should think again. | 1 |
Cars, they make life so much easier, or, do they make them deadlier? The amount of green house gasses has increaced dramaticly over the past years, due to the gasses emitted through the tallpipes of cars. However, there has been ways that people are trying to lower these gasses. People around the world are reducing the use of cars for a more cleaner form of transportation. In Vauban, Germany residents in this community "have givin up their cars"(1). Also in Paris where they "enforce a partial driving ban to clear the air"(10). While in Bogota, Colombia they have a car free day to "promote alternative transportation and reduce smog"(20). These cities are pioneers in the way of a cleaner form of travel.
The first step is to just have a day without cars, like a new holiday. In Bogota, thats just what they have. On this day "millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work"(20), and those who didn't were fined. This reduces not only smog but the stress of driving and the business of traffic jams. On one of these car-free days, even though it was raining the spirits of the people didn't dampen. Enrique Riera, the mayor of Asunción, Paraguay, said "these people are generating a revolutionary change and [that it] is crossing borders"(26), when he visited Bogota. As a result of these days "parks and sports centers have bloomed throughout the city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks; rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic; and new restrants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up"(28).
Another way that the car-free idea is shaking up is in Paris, France. On a Monday "motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home"(11), if they didnt they would recieve a 22-euro fine. There smog riviled Beijing, "known as one of the most polluted cities in the world"(14). Hovever, after only one day, "the smog cleared enough [on Monday that] the ruling French party [rescinded] the ban for odd-numbered plates on Tuesday"(19).
The biggest leap, however, would be a town with no cars. Vauban, Germany is a community where "street parking, driveways and home garages are generally forbidden"(2). The streets are filled with "the swish of bicyles and the chatter of wandering children"(3) instead of motors and horns. This expirimental town has sparked a new way of life; a cleaner, safer way of life.
We have gone on thousands of years without cars, and after they were introduced they polluted the air and caused us stress. So if we could go on without them before, then why can't we now. As demostraighted by Paris, Bogota and Vauban life isn't that bad without a wheel to sit behind. | 3 |
Studying Venus is a worth pursuit because it can help us in the long run if something happens to earth. In paragraph 4 it states that "furthermore, recall that venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary vist." Also Venus and Earth are the same in many ways. For example, in paragraph 2 it says "Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance to." These were some reasons why Venus it worth to pursuit.
The reason that Venus should be studyed is in case that Earth populations grows to big for Earth and need more space. In the article in says that NASA has already set ships and since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Its safe to say that this mission is harder than any other, but its not impossible. Venus is probably the best plant to study maybe besides Mars but it had so much incommon with Earth there is chance it may work. In paragraph 4 it says "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus becasue it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long age, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of live, just like earth."Venus and Earth are alike in a lot of ways.
Those are some reasons to study Venus. That planet and our planet are so similar that maybe that could be the next plant we step foot in. It may take decades but if achieved that could be one of our best accomplishments. So maybe think about why it is important to study our galaxy. | 2 |
While there are many speculations between whether the use of "Driverless Cars" is a good idea or not, I believe that it is a good idea to have them.
The use of the driverless car can be very helpful as long as there are guidelines that go along with the use of the car.
Guidelines such as how there must be a licensed driver in the car and at the wheel at all times.
The reason that a rule like that should be put into place is because if the car is having a mechanical issue and stops working it could put the owner of the vehichle and others outside of the car at risk of injury or death.
Another useful way that is a possitive for the car is that if you are injured from the waste down and can no longer use your legs or feet you would still be able to drive.
The person with the issue would have to go to the BMV to get special approval of getting your license so in case of an emergency you would be able to control the wheel of the car to direct it towards safety.
If you were unable to use your legs you would be able to drive the car with the steering wheel as long as the rest of the car, as in the brakes and accelerator, would still be monitored and controlled by the car itself.
In paragraph two it states that google has had a car that can drive itself but it is not truly driverless, it alerts the driver to pull out of the driveway or dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents.
I believe that a car like that should be the vision for all car manufacturers because it also states in paragraph two that google cars have driven over half a million miles and not a single crash has occured.
If all manufacturers had this vision it would be a good starting point that could later on help pursue the vision of making a car fully autonomous.
In essence the world needs to set goals to help get them to the vision that they truly want to reach, which is a fully autonomous car so that anyone blind, paralyzed, or just not licensed can be at the wheel of the vehicle.
If the car were to be made Sergey Brin will fulfill his idea of having a fleet of public transportation that can take people from place to place.
He forsees that it could make split the price of fuel in half since his design for the car only uses half the fuel a normal public taxi would need.
That is why i believe autonomous cars are the future. | 2 |
Do you belive in the supernatural or in acient civilizations, like aliens? Well I don't. In the passage "Unmasking the Face of Mars" there are two major opinoins on if there once was a civilization on Mars or if it was a natural landform. Based on text and factual evidence I belive that the "face" on Mars is a natural land form.
First, "on April 8, 2001- a cloudless summer day in Cydonia-Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look." (10) "Malin's team captured an extrodinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resoulotion." (10) Which Means they got the best picure they could.
In addition, "As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digitial image 3 times bigger than you the pixel size. (11) "So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you would be able to see what they were!" (11) This proves that if it was a civilization, then it would have other structure too, but it doesn't.
My last peice of evidence comes from (paragraph 12), "The picture acutally shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa0landforms common around the American West." "It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho," says Gavin." "That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars." (12)
Finally, to oppose my argument the article also stated that, "The Face on Mars is located at 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was winter in April '98- a cloudy time of year on the Red Planet. (9) Some people are not satisfied with the results. They say,"The camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the Face. Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze." (9)
Based on experts, text, and factual evidence I belive that the "Face" on Mars is a natural land form. I belive that the "Face" on Mars is just a natural landform because the author uses evidnce like how they went back on a clear day a took magnified-detailed photos and how things would have showed up if there were things living on Mars. Now, do you belive that there are civilizations on Mars? | 2 |
"As a result, 70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold a car to move here. 'When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way,' said Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two, as she walked verdant streets where the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drown out the occasional distant motor" (Rosenthal paragraph 2). Heidrun Walter is the typical mother of two that has a job as a media trainer. Unlike most people, Heidrun lives in the city of Vauban, Germany. Vauban is a one of a kind district that cracks down on car use and promotes walking and public transportation. Heidrun describes this life as a happier one and that cars make things tense. There are advantages to this way of life such as a rexaled lifestyle and fewer pollutions.
Not having a car makes one persons life less stressful by making the internet a better way to communicate, having funner ways to transport yourself, and making it easier to access stores. Getting in a car to go to a freinds house is in most cases is a long stressful process that can be eliminated through a culture without cars that opens up Internet use to communicate instead. "She cites various factors: the Internet makes telecommuting possible and allows people to feel more connected without driving to meet friends" (Rosenthal paragraph 35). Mimi Sheller is explaining how you don't have to get into a car to be with your friends and that the Internet is a simplier option. Instead of using a car to get to work, it may be a healthier and funner option for people to start walking or riding a bike. " 'It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution,' said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife" (Rosenthal paragraph 24). In the quote, Carlos describes how stress is relieved by lower pollution and opening yourself up to activities that you and someone you love could enjoy while getting to work. Stress can be driven by simple things in life such as trying to find a parking spot to access the market. "In this new approach, stores are placed a walk away, on a main street, rather than in malls along some distant highway" (Rosenthal paragraph 6). To have less stress in your life it could be easier to live in a no cqar community that makes any store you need only a walk away from your house leaving you free of the harshness of finding a parking spot. Internet communication, alternate transportation, and walk ways to stores make a happier and healthier life for the average person.
Cars in most countrioes are the leading pollutants and it could be wise for people to try and reduce smog, greenhouse emissions and diesel use by not picking up tthe keys to your car. Smog in some place has gotten so bad that car use had to be stopped completely. "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog . . .[The smog] rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world" (Rosenthal paragraph 14). Paris went through major smog that makes them reconsidering the use of automobiles. | 1 |
The author does an excellent job of supporting his idea by giving us information like the temperature, physical structures, and the weather that occurs there. GIving us many reason why it's to challenging to go to Venus. There is multiple challenges would have to face in order to be on Venus.
One challenge would be the temperature that Venus may reach to which is about 800 degrees Fahrenheit. Which the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. " These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals." Like it said in the passage it is way to extreme for humans to be on Venus because of it's high temperatures.
Another challenge you may come across is the weather and other physical behaviors. In the passage for example it said, " Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes,and frequant lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface." That would be a tough challenge because you would have to land on Venus and then you would have to be prepared for the behaviors of the planet and its weather. Which you would need some equipment and tools to figure out how to successfully accomplish the challenge and being able to survive.
A third challenge you may come across is making the right spacecraft, try to make it a safe trip to Venus , and making a good landing. Just being able to be on the planet for a good amount of time. In the passage it said, "Because Venus is sometimes right around the corner- in space terms-humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world. Each previous mission was unmanned , and for a good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours." You have to be able to put a lot of work and close detail to make the spacecraft safe and just having some access to some of the tools or materials that would have to be used for the spacecraft.
In general the challenge of exploring Venus is massive. You may find a whole bunch of mini challenges to discover another challenge. It may take a long time, dedication, and effort to explore Venus but it may just happen. | 3 |
Imagine is a good way to detect exactly how people's feeling, even when people wants to hide their emotions. To read the emotional expressions is also important and valuable for our students in class.
There is a technology called the Facial Action Coding System, it can able to help people to identify human emotions on the computers. It also has promising applications for a variety of insudtries. This technology can use 3-D to scan the face, there are 44 major muschles in the model must move like human muscles, and the software can even identify mixed emotions.
Dr. Huang said:"The facial expressions for wach emotion are universal." In reality, our human are performing the same impressive every day, just like the article said:"You can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." We can observe the emotions from people who are around us every day, we can describe they are happy or make something troubles.
Everyone of us have a conversation everyday, we can learn the personality through people's emotion during the school. We can not only use the languague to talk, but also can use the emotion to have a communication, just like the people who can not talk to each other, but they still can use the emotion to expression their feelings.
In this article, Dr. Huang observes da Vinci also studied human anatomy to help him to paint facial muscles predcisely enough to convey specfic emotions. This imagine demonstration is really intended to bring a smile to your face, just like the computer knows you are happy or sad. If you are following the Web ad appears, then there will have a similar ad comeout. But if you do not follow it, they will change a different for you.
When we have a classroom computer, it will recognize us is bored or confused about it, then it could modify the lesson, just like an effective human instructor. The emotions have a big effect during the class, we should learn how to read the emotional expressions and also manage our emotion better.
The mirror shows in this article is important too, it suggest an emotion when we have expression. Actually it is all about the muscular action units. When we have a meanwhile, our muscle make crow's-feet around your eyes. But our muscle will change to stretched when we have a wrong smile. So the muscle makes our smile truthful beacuse our faces do not lie.
A drama coach had his actors carefully produce smiling and creating emotions on stage. Your face shows happy even though you do not happy, but it still an help you to produce the happy muscle. For example, even you are not happy, but you are effected by the people who are making a happy face to you, you still can change your emotion even a little bit.
We cannot believe that technology teach us a lot, and we never think that making faces can reveal the emotional expressions of students in a classroom. It is valuable to express people's emotion, and it is also important to detect people's feeling. | 3 |
Did you know that Venus is the brightest point of light in the sky. Sometimes people look at the sky, they see Venus and they think is just a star. Some people call it "Evening Star" wich is not often use becuase Venus is a planet. Venus is also call the Earth's twin. This nickname is given because Venus is one of the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size.
Lately scientists are discusing about making visits to Venus. The article states that "Astmonomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like
planet in our solar system" wich makes them think that long ago Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported forms of life. Scientists know that Venus has a suface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as mountainsand craters.They claim that Venus can sometime be our nearest option for a planetary visit, which is a curcial concideration given to long time frames of space travel.
In conclusion the author of this text has given us proves that, The National Aeronautics and Space Administration well known as NASA has been studying possible ways to go to Venus wich could take a long time. Temperatures there are very high for a human been. NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus. They had simplified electronics made of silicon carbide wich have been tested in a chamber simulating
the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in the condition they would exoerience at Venus. I strongly agree that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger it presents. | 2 |
In Miami, sitting in traffic is simply a part of everyday life, be it during lunch hour or rush hour or be it because of unpredictable accidents or planned road closures. The city is so large that it is oftentimes impossible to walk from point A to point B in a timely manner, and the climate is so unpredictable that is is oftentimes impossible to make such a trek anyways. Could Miami ever be made a car-free community? Considering that these types of communities lower municipal carbon emissions, require better city planning, and encourage people to take advantage of public transportation, Miami, and other cities and suburbs around the United States, should make efforts to reduce private car ownership and use.
Car-free communities are not a theoretical concept. In fact, cities and smaller suburbs have made the move to car-free lifestyles and even been designed with limited car usage in mind all over the world, and even in some parts of the United States. Places like Vauban, Germany and Bogota, Colombia are using this trend to make citizens happier, healthier, and more efficient (Rosenthal, Selsky). Alternative transportation, be it walking, bicycling, or taking a bus, is just as viable a way to get around as cars are, and it leads to smarter city planning that accounts for a higher volume of pedestrians walking from their homes to run errands and go shopping and a lessened impact on the environment through fewer greenhouse gas emissions. These things also work together to make for happier citizens. "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," says businessman Carlos Arturo about Bogota's city-wide car-free day, a program instituted by city officials to encourage limited car usage in 1999 (Selsky). A mother of two and media trainer in Vaudan, Germany, where 70 percent of families do not own cars, agrees with Mr. Arturo, saying that life with cars was "always tense" (Rosenthal).
It is very understandable that cars would make people nervous. "Cars are responsible for ... up to 50 percent" of greenhouse gas emissions in some areas of the United States (Rosenthal). Greenhouse gas is notoriously harmful for the environment because it speeds up the process of global warming which can result in higher mean temperatures and things like smog that can bring up very serious health risks. Record high levels of smog in Paris, France last year forced city officials to institute a temporary ban on driving while the city's air was allowed to clear (Duffer). Paris typically has a higher amount of pollution in the air than other more eco-conscious European cities, sometimes even a full 67.3 micrograms higher than the level of pollution in London according to Reuters, an international news agency (Duffer).
Car-free communities lower carbon emissions tremendously, making smog and other consequences of greenhouse gases much less pressing issues to deal with. In order to reduce the number of cars on the roads, public transportation must be readily accessible and as effictient as possible. This helps city governments manage the amount of carbon they are pumping into the atmosphere by giving them the opportunity to regulate things such as buses, subways, and other forms of metro transit. Public transportation does not only mean actual modes of transportation, though; car-free communities must make allowances for the creation and maintainment of things like better sidewalks and bicicyle paths for citizens who elect to use them (Rosenthal, Selsky). Congestion would then also be lowered because fewer cars on roadways usually do not result in city-typical, and definitely Miami-typical, traffic jams (Duffer).
While it is impossible to assume that Americans will stop using their cars from one day to the next, there are many ways to gradually increase the appeal of car-free lifestyles in commuter cities and suburbs and therefore to reap some of the benefits of diminished popular car usage. In fact, milennials in America have already started this move towards car-free communities (Rosenthal). Younger generations are waiting longer to apply for their licenses and buy cars, instead choosing to utilize public transportation, walk, or car-pool with friends. Sociologists have also noticed that America has surpassed peak car usage, meaning that Americans no longer drive as much as they once did. The "car culture" that prevails in suburbs and cities through the nation may be on its way into obscurity if the trend continues (Rosenthal). Scientists, sociologists, and citizens alike will most likely agree that this move will indubitably be one for the better! | 4 |
Our solar system has always been something that humans can not fully comprhend; the concept of infinitety, space, and even other life forms. Through human curosity, we have made progression and answered many of our own questions about space, but we have yet to learn about the endevors of Venus, the ¨ Evening Star¨. Because of it's rough conditions, it has brought many challenges to scientist, but despite them all, many people believe that Venus is worthy the pursuit.
Venus has been know as the Earth's ¨twin¨ for many years. It has many harsh conditions such as the temperature, atmospheric pressure, and clouds that contain sulfuric acid. These are conditions that are far too extreme for any human to handle. According to the passage, ¨, such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our ocean and would liquefy many metals.¨( Paragraph 3). If such hard conditions, why would scientist even want to go to Venus? With powerful earthquakes, erupting volcanoes, and frequent lightning strikes, how would this benefit human science?
According to the author of ¨The Challenge of Exploring Venus¨, astronomers are facinated by Venus because at one point in time, it was probably the most similar planet to Earth. Scientist believe that Venus was once covered by large oceans that could have supported numerous life forms remensient to Earth. From the information we have gathered, Venus has similar surface features to Earth, such as valleys, craters, and mountians. The questions futher about future missions to Venus- how can astronomers construct a plan that will safely bring humans back home while receving worthy information?
NASA has been trying to solve this problem for a long time. They have found possible soultions such as making devices to have astronuts float above the planet or even upgrade old technology that could with stand these harmful conditions. The author of this passage gave other ways that they are trying to solve this problem. One way would be having some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide that would be able to stand strong in Venus' environment. The author says that this would be a good subsitute for humans because not only has it lasted 3 weeks in chamber stimulations, but we can still gather useful information that scientist can use to make valid objections.
The world we live in is nothing compared to the universe that we live in. Humans have adapted to the earthly conditons that have surrounded us from the begging of time. As time has advanced, human's have advanced with it. Now that we have been able to go to space, we want to know about it all- even the harsh conditions and dangers of it all. The ¨Evening Star¨ is always something that astronomers will be curious about, but with the advancments that we can make from going to this planet, will all the dangers be worth the risk? | 3 |
Dear State Sentor,
First off, I disagree with the Electoral College. I have a strong hope that we need to change to election by popular vote for president. The Electoral College is a process of the selection of the electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for President and Vice President, and the counting of the electoral votes by Congress (office of the federal Register 2). In source two it announces that the electoral college is an unfair way to votes. In my opinion I agree strongly with that statement because not everyone would get a fair oppurtunity.
Secondly, everyone has the right to voice their opinion on who they want to elect as president. With the Electoral College we wouldn't be able to voice our opinion as because as Source 2 explains that if you have Electoral College system the voters would vote for a slate of electors, but not for president. The state of electors would be the ones to elect the president. Therefore the people wouldnt get a voice to vote only the 29 people in Florida-shown on the map in source 3-not the whole state which makes it not an equal oppurtinuty to everyone who lives in that state.
Next, when having Electoral College instead of population vote the picked voters could pick someone wrong. In source two it mentions that sometimes the senator could vote for the wrong person sometimes and not always can they control their vote. To add on to that the electoral college is the "disaster factor". The reason that it is the diaster factor is because the state legislatures are responsible for picking the electors and they could pick everyone thats agasinst a certain president and that the "better" president isn't picked and has a chance of our state being ruined.
Finally, my fellow friends of the State Senator I persuade you in choosing to change electing the president to popular vote instead of continuing on with the Electoral College method. In the United States we need to have a fair way of allowing everyone to vote therefore please help me in choosing to change the electon to popular vote.
Sincerely, PROPER_NAME | 2 |
The use of this advanced technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable from three reasons in the article that the author tells us by reading this article.
It's interesting to think ahead and create something big that no one can do. In paragraph 3, the author says, "The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles." The 44 muscles can tell how the human is feeling, by seeing how the person is moving. For example, when the person is moving really fast, it means that the person might be angry or aggressive. But when a person is moving slow, it means that the person is sad or depressed.
The author tells in the text, "We humans perform this same impressive calculation every day." But comparing a human mind to a computer is different. A human mind can think that the friend is feeling sad, but the computer can have more than just one idea of how the friend feels. The computer can have more than one idea by scanning the face of the person and calculating how the muscles of the face look. It may seem amazing to try to use the technology.
From the picture of Mona Lisa, when you just look at it, many ideas would pop up in your head from trying to guess how she's feeling and how she looks. There would be multiple guesses on how her face looks. In paragraph 6, the author says, "The Mona Lisa demonstration is really intended to bring a smile to your face, while it shows just how much this computer can do." Some people might say that she looks mostly happy, a bit disgusted, somewhat fearful, and a little angry. Or they might say all of them and more. We all have different minds, different thoughts, and a different sights at describing a picture.
Moreover, the article gives us a lot of information of the advanced technological computer that constructs a 3-D model, to scan a human face and tell how the person feels emotionally. It's amazing and interesting to even read about Dr. Huang and Prof. Sebe ,his colleague, are both experts at developing better ways for humans and computers to communicate. | 1 |
There are many reasons why people would think that the face was created by aliens. There are also many reasons why people would think it is a natural landform. Either way, do we really know what it is?
The face is a very mysterious thing. It's not every day you see something resemble a face on a planet. There are many people out there that believe it is just a natural landform. People think that because there are many landforms on Earth that resemble a face so why think that aliens did it just because it is on another planet. Also they might not belive in aliens.
There are also people who think aliens created it. They think this because it really isn't an everyday think to see a landform that resembles a face. So they start to think what could have created that. Since it is on Mars they instantly think aliens. They think aliens because they can't think of what else could cause that and they think aliens can do crazy things like shape the land. Also people read things from newspaper articles that talk about it and watch movies about aliens and see them do crazy things like shape the land and other crazy things.
People who think the face is just a natural landform probably think the people that believe aliens made it are crazy. They might think they are crazy because there is no proof that aliens exist, so why think that something that might not exist create something like a face in a planet. It makes more sense that it is a natural landform that just so happens to resemble a face. Not many scientists believed it was an alien artifact so many people would think that is a natural landform because scientists don't believe it is something aliens created.
On April 5, 1998 Michael Malin and his "Mars Orbiter Camera" took a picture of the face. The picture was ten times sharper than the original and it proved that it was just a natural landform. People who believed aliens created it were unsatisfied because the way Mars faced in 98' it was winter time. So it was very cloudy. But on April 8, 2001 he set out for another picture. They took an extrodinary picture. Again it proved it was just a landform. So therefore the people who thought it was just a landform were correct.
In conclusion people had many reasons to believe what they believed. Michael Malin had to find out the answer and find out what exaclty made it. That's exaclty what he did. He found out it was just a landform that resembled a face. But does that mean that the people who believe aliens created it believe that it is just a landorm because of a picture? Maybe not but almost everyone believes/knows it is a landform because of the picture and observations. | 2 |
The Face on Mars was site to see and i think its a site to behold. Still there are some people that think the Face on Mars was created by Aliens,but its not. Conspiracy theorists might say this but i don't believe it, but my colleague does. So, I created this special report to show my friend that the Face is just a landform.
First off, the technology back in 1976 wasn't very good. The 1976 photo of the Face looks very blurry from the looks of it.When tech got an upgrade in 1998, the image wasn't as blurry as the first photo. Then, in 2001, NASA took a another photo of the Face when the conditions on Mars were just right and proved it was a landform.
Second, Mesa and Buttes are area of raised land, so I bet that since the area here is higher than any other area, it could create a shadow over it.The Face is located in the north Martian latitude where it was winter, which is a cloudy time of year for the Red planet. The camera on the MGS had to try and see through the clouds to see. NASA said it was not easy to target Cydonia(the region where Face on Mars is located) because the MGS is a mapping spacecraft that looks straight down and ca't move anywhere else.
Lastly, NASA had to be in the perfect spot to take a picture. In 2001, the MGS was able to get close enough to get a look at Face. Jim Garvin's team had to center the craft to get a good enough angle on the Face. To prove for sure that it was a landform, Garvin used the camera's maximum resolution to get the best pictures. Garvin said that you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size, so if there were any objects in the photo, you would see them.
I think that is enough evidence to show my friend that the Face on Mars is a landform.Sadly, I wish it was truly created by Martians. That would be an interesting find if I do say so myself. | 2 |
Politicians and the public have argued for years over one burning question: Should the Electoral College be discontinued? I believe the Electoral College should not be used in the United States anymore. To understand the faults within this system, one must understand the system at its basic level. The Electoral College is a system that consists of 538 electors. Each state has a different amount of electors, granted on the size of that state's population. When the election is held, the voter votes for the electors, not the candidate directly.
The first fault one can find while examining this system is the "winner takes all" policy that most states have. In paragraph seven of the first souce, the article states, "Most states have a "winner-takes-all" system that awards all electors to the winning presidental candidate." This system seems unfair, especially in states where the vote for electors is won by a small margin. The votes cast for the candidate who lot the electoral votes in their state are not counted in choosing the president, which hinders the ideals of democracy in this country. In paragraph nine of the second source, the article reads," according to a Gallup poll in 200, taken shortly after Al Gore, thanks to the quirks of the Electoral College, won the popular vote but lost the presidency." This crisis in 2000, when George W. Bush won the electoral college, but Al Gore won the popular vote, displays the lack of clarity with this system. This election was a prime example that the president is not chosen by the popular voice, but rather by the Electoral College, which does not accurately represent everyone.
The second fault with Electoral College stems from the first issue: people are not voting beacuse they feel as if their voice is not being heard. Stated as a counterargument in paragraph 23 of source three, the article states, "It can be argued that the Electoral College method...may turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope for carrying their state - Democrats in Texas, for example, or Republicans in California." People are choosing not to vote because they feel as if their voice is being shadowed by the major polictical thinking in their state, and this mindset corrupts the institution of democracy in the United States.
An argument made by those in favor of the Electoral College can found in paragraph 20 of source three, "Voters in toss up states are more likely to pay attention to the campaign...They are likely to be the most thoughtful voters, on average and the most thoughtful voters shoule be the ones to decide the election." This argument is opinionated and has no substantial evidence behind it. According to source 2 in paragraph 13, "During the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see the candidates at all." This was due to the candidates spending their time, money, and efforts to win over "swing states", the states that could go either Republican or Democrat depending on the candidates that year.
The Electoral College is a system that should not be used anymore because it does not properly consider the opinions of all voters, turns away voters who believe they will not have their voices heard, and leave states without seeing ads or candidates during the election because these candidates are trying to win over other states. | 4 |
I think it is a good idea because if someone is feeling like he or she wans to kill their selves that the computer will pick it up and you can get help for that person. Then you can tell if someon is having a good day and you can joke around a little. If you could tell if someone was not happy you could try to do something to make them happy. It can tell you six basic emotions. It can pick up on a lot of your emotions. It can help you figer out what you are felling. If you find out what your friend is feeling you could help them feel different. If someone is strugling with depression you could find it out with your computer and then tell them that you know what they are going through and that they need to go talk to a person who can help them cope with their depression. I think it would be fun to just expirement on people to see if they like me or not. The computer is able to take a picture of you and tell what you are feeling by looking at your face muscle. | 1 |
Dear Senator, I feel the need to bring the Electoral College to your attention. I think keeping the Electoral College is not a good way to vote for the president of the United States. It's an unfair way to vote. 538 electors and the majority of 270 votes to elect the president seems to have problems every time. If the person running for office has more votes it obviously means they want that person to win the election. So why go around that process and change everything and make it more difficult for the person to win? People all over keep trying to change things with voting but don't have a choice. When they vote for someone in office it doesn't equal a whole percent which actually goes towards whether or not they will or will not be president. Thanks to the Electoral College it makes things harder. Thats's why people don't like to vote. So Senator, please think about getting rid of the Electoral College it's fair that the person with the most votes should win because if everyone voted for them they wanted that person to win. That's more fair than popular votes and then what the other 538 people have to say.
Sincerly,
PROPER_NAME | 1 |
Lowering our car usage will be beneficial for all of us, the advantages of doing this will be huge, and will help the enviroment. Lately a lot of studies have revealed that one of the most eviroment-harming actions are the emissions that cars release into the atmosphere. If we lower our car usage we will help the enviroment of the planet we are living in, it only seems logical to do so.
One of the reasons lowering car usage would be helpful is beacause it would significantly lower gas emissions from cars. This would greatly help our enviroment. According to the text, "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States.". This shows how harmful this emissions are, and why we should try to lower them.
Lowering our car usage and creating car-free suburbs or car-reduced communities would help our daily life. Driving a car every day can be stressful because of trafic and road rage.
lowering our car usage would help people relieve stress and even get some excercise. According to the text, "When i had a car i was always tense. I'm much happier this way". This shows how stress-relieving reducing car usage could be.
Also lowering car usage could be a way for the goverment to create more bicycle paths. This would be really helpful to the people who only have a bicycle as a way of transportation. According to the text,"The day without cars is part of an improvement campaing tha began in Bogota in the mid-1990s. It has seen the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths"
There are some people that do not agree with this idea, most of them say that it would hurt the car industry. Of course it will, but this is for a greater good. So let's reduce our car usage and help our enviroment. | 2 |
The face we found on mars wasn't made by a alien spacecraft.
The camera had to peer through wispy slouds to see the face so it could be just a giant rock formation made by the landscapes.
It is the martian equivalent of a butte or mesa landforms common around the
American West the landform also reminds us mostly of middle butte in the snake river plain of idaho. And the lava dome that takes the form of anisolated mesa about the same height as the face on mars.
Scientists figured it was just another martian mesa,common enough sround Cydonia,only thing different was this one had unusual shadows. Some people might think it's alien because they have seen the face appear on hollywood films,and books. We used a different camera which each pixel image spans 1.56 meters so if there were objects in this picture like airplanesmon the ground or Egyptian pyramids or even small shacks you would be able to see what they were. It doesn't really look like a face it's like some clay you put together then pock some holes in it and say this is a face. | 1 |
Here are a few reasons why you should join the seagoing cowboy.
Why you should join if you join you help the world and its places recover. What I mean by that is at the time world war 2 ended. And different countrys including us were left in ruins. Along with helping the world reshape you can visit places you never been before. Meet new people but do forget the the world isn't always fun it's still a dangarous job but don' let that drag you down.
According to luke it does take some geting used to in paragraph 7 luke fell down a latter when it was raining. He cracked some ribs and nearly fell from the boat. But don't get scared being a seagoing cowboy isn't all work. There are time when you can relax and play sports. In the room were you'd carry animals in.
But in the end it up to you do you wnat to take that small risk and be a seagoing cowboy or not. | 1 |
The Famous Face in Space!
Above us there is a mysterious world out there. A whole complete different area that us humans aren't that familiar with. We have traveled there many times, but there, we can only go so far. The only way we have access to the farther part of space is through specially made robots. Scientist have built robots and satalites that are able to do the job for us. Right now we have these robots on mars helping us get information! In 1976 scientist discoverd that there was a rock shaped figure of a face on Mars, and what everyone wants to know is, "How did this face appear on this planet?"
The "Face on Mars" became a huge senstaion. It was starred in Hollywood movies, books, magazines, and even radios talks. This rock shape of a face was famous for over 25 years in a grocery store checkout lines! This face contains eyes, nose, and a mouth! That's all that it needs to start up a huge debate on rather this face belongs to an alien, or is it just some little birthmark on the planet Mars.
I am not some special scientist, nor have I done research on this face, but i don't believe that this is a face of an alien. Very few scientist do believe that this is the face of an alien. I find this hard to believe because technology has gotten more bigger and better. I could understand why back then so many people believed this accustaion, but it is 2016 now. This face was found in 1976. Technology has grown severly and yet we have no proof stating that this is an aliens face, nor do we have any proof proving that aliens are real. We have information sources in space and on mars right now and they have been there for years, and not once did these sources find information on any aliens living in space.
Many scientist and non-scientist have made several different theories about this face. Many have different oppinions too. Some believe that this is the face of an alien, and some also believe that this is just some other makebelieve story. Although there are pictures of the face proving it is there, many like to make their own predictions. We are all clueless about this weird mark on Mars, but i would hope that we can believe our specially trained scientist. They have been doing this for years, and I believe that if they say something isn't real or didn't happen that way, then we should believe it because if we can't believe them, then who else do would we believe? | 2 |
Millions of people use cars in their everyday lives whether its driving to work, school or even the supermarket. With the amount of people on the streets on a daily basis, its not suprising that there is a major traffic issue in Miami. Most people dont realise how big of an issue this truly is because in reality they just need to get to and from work. I'm here to inform you about the beneficial alternatives to driving everywhere you go.
Whether going to work or driving your kids to soccer practice, a way of transportation is a must. Most people choose the "easy" way out and just hop in their brand new luxury cars. But what if I told you there is an easier way, a more efficient way? All around Miami, there are metro rail stations. These stations are clean, safe, and not to mention useful. There are busses, trolly's, and even metro movers that can take you all around the city. the trains, busses, trolly's and metro movers all run on a schedule. An easy way to limit your gas bill, pollusion and time wasted in traffic is to simply set up a route to where you need to go and catch the appropriate mose of transportation.
Time is always on peoples mind, whether you have enough time to go shopping for a new dress or maybe stop by grandmas house. all things require time. Everyday millions of Americans spend hours stuck in traffic due to rush-hour. This means less time spent with family andmore tijme bonding with the annoying car horns constantly beeping. If you could switch to another mode of transportation you could cut time commuting in half. The Metro rail avoides all traffic regardless and if more people start thinking like this then the bus might soon be avoidingall traffic too. Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two says "When i had a car i was always tense. I'm much happier this way." Everyday she walks verdant streets listening to the delightful sound of people chatting and children playing, something she was unable to appretiate with her windows rolled up as she drove around town.
So many fuel consuming vehicles on the street on a daily basis can't be too great for our enviroment, don't you think? It isnt, all this pollution is causing a nasty smog all over the world, some places more than others. Paris tends to have more smog than Europe but not too long ago, Paris had 147 micrograms or particulate matter per cubic meter compared to 114 in Brussels. This smog makes it difficult for dilivery companies to complete their jobs. This smog isnt good for us either just think about what you are breathing. | 3 |
Many students will benefit from this software if it can truly sense emotions.
If the software is truly like it suggests, students in the classroom could improve grades significantly.
If students grades improve, their moral would improve, their stress levels would decrease dramatically, and they would have a better learning experience because of personalized lessons.
This software could be a major benificial tool in future schools.
If the software can automatically improve the learning experience of students it would be for the better all of the way around.
The aritcle provides a quote from Dr. Huang that states, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor."
It seems like the software in schools would not abolish teachers, but merely help them with a students learning experience.
Each student learns in a different way, and the software is intended to fix that problem in schools.
Therefore diminishing confusion and improving grades, and in conclusion, improving the moral of students.
With grades improving, students would be able to focus more quickly and more often.
It would also provide a sense of comfort and provide a significant decrease in stress.
As long as personalized lessons are in place, students would become more comfortable with the topics that they are learning and that ultimately improves test scores which goes back into improving moral.
With the Facial Action Coding System in effect, students would have an overall better learning experience.
Students that are able to learn and understand the material tend to do better on tests.
If the software is in place, it will change the learning experience to that particular person so they are able to understand that particular topic, which causes better test scores, which causes a moral boost, and decreases stress levels.
If the Facial Action Coding System is placed in full effect in schools everywhere, students would improve their grades dramatically purely on the foundation of personalized lessons.
If students grades improve, they will see an improvement in their moral, as well as having decreased stress levels, and most importantly have a better learning experience.
This software could provide major benefits to schools around the world, and one may not understand why it is not in effect in schools today. | 3 |
As of April 2013 the number of miles driven per person was down 9 percent. So that means people are starting not to drive as much, which is not a bad thing. Actually they're many advantages to limiting car usage. Limiting car usage can actually help the environment, help the emissions, and if we do limit car usage it can make cities denser as well as having some places that don't use cars. Which will be good for the world.
Transportation is really big in America. People drive all the time, were a moving country. So driving and using cars does effect our enviornment. One big thing going on is smog. One country that i can point out is Paris. Paris had so much smog that they enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of global city. "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog..." according to the article Paris bans driving due to smog by Robert Duffer. Paris has more smog than other european capitals. Which is really bad because that can effect us as humans. In Bogota They are doing a program that involves banning cars for a day. The goal was to promote transportation and reduce smog which it did. So limiting car usage can improve safety and make the environment more clean.
Limiting car usage can also have beneficial implications for carbon emissions. If we created cities with pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, it can lower emissions and if the emissions are in good care then the environment will be to, "since transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions, just behind power plants." President Obama has goals to curb the United States greenhouse gas emissions. Experts say" Is a huge impediment to current eforts to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions from tailpipes..." according to the article In German suburb, Life Goes on Without Cars, by Elisabeth Rosenthal she says" Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United states. So thats pretty bad so if we limit car usage we can help fix that and maybe even have a lower percentage on emissions.
Vauban home to 5,500 residents are really taking limitation to cars serious. They may be the most advanced experiement in low-car suburban life. But they are doing really good. Other countries around the world are adopting what they are doing in attempts to make suburbs more compact and more accessible, which is a good thing. Espescially for people that dont use cars, and especially if your trying to make the air more cleaner. According to In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars, "Vauban, copleted in 2006 is an example of a growing trend in Europe, the United States and elsewhere to seperate suburban life from auto use, as a component of a movement called " Smart planing"." This is a advantage for the world because we need to have someplaces that actually dont use cars. Also Vauban can inspire other countries to do the same. Which will be a advantage.
So they're are many advantages for limiting car usage. A lot has to do with the environment like it reduces smog and helps emissions which will be better for the world. The biggest advantage for limitation on car usage is pretty much a better world and who wouldnt want to live in a better world. It can also help other places be like Vauban. They don't use cars as much and it works for them, and a lot of people should start doing that. These advantages will really help the world if we do decide to ever limit car usage. | 3 |
On the 24th of May in 2001, Twenty Five years ago somehting had happened around Mars. NASA sent Viking 1 to circle the planet to take picture, record data, and searching for possible lasing sites for its sister ship Viking 2. But on it voyage it spotted a figure shaped like a human face. This was a start to see if life on mars was even possible.
As NASA did research on the figure they ran tests, and did many other things to collect data form the subject. They unveiled the image for people all around the world to see. And that wasnt exactly a good idea. It caused many complications and conflict. But that didnt stop us from doing more research with the figure. Yes, some scientists believed that face resembled or was an alien artifact. But our proof, such as pictures, data, and many other things object that matter. The Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time and snapped a picture of the human faced shaped object, in the article it states
"Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing . . . a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all." Thsi revaeling that NASA,
The Mars Global Surveyor, and many other people have proof to disagree with the argument. But everyone has a right to have their own opinion. Even though another pitcure was taken proving that the "artifact" found is the "Martian equivalent of a butte or mesalandforms common around the American West." As many other scientists have figured out.
In addition to the stated proof above, many people disagree with us. The scientific facts are not enough for people to believe. So even after the pictures were taken and the evidece was proven Many were still not satistifed. Only becasue The face of Mars is located 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was winter in April, producing a thin wispy layer of clouds that you had to peer through to see the face. So others controdicted and thought "Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze." But they have a right to think this. But NASA and many other scientific people have took the time to find the answers. They came up with reasonable, testable answers that can be proven to be right. The face is in deed just a natural land form. I hope that the peope who are reading this can take time to reconsider the other outcomes of this shadowy human shaped face figure and think about the data and answer that were found and see what others went through to prove that their case was a true form of evidence proving what they think this figure is. Thank you. and Please reconsider, and give an effort and try to understant that the Face is just a natural landform. | 3 |
The "Face on Mars" is not a face. The face is just a natural landform on Mars. It might have look like one in the 1976 picture of it. The "Face on Mars" is a natural landform.
In the 1976 picture of it, might have look like a face since we didn't have the technology to see it better. It resembled a human head, but it was the shadows that gave the illusion of eyes, nose, and head. Then in 1998 the NASA went back to mars to take more pictures and it turn out be a natural landform. From far away it might have look like a face, but close up it was a mesa. Somepeople wasn't satisfied about it intill we saw what it really was in 2001.
In 2001 NASA sent a drone to take picture of the Face on Mars. It turn to be a Matain mesa which was common around Cydonia. In article it states that that that shadows made the illusion that it was a face. NASA wish there was a n acient civilization on Mars, but wasn't. The finding of the Face on Mars spreaded to books magazines, radio talk shows and more.
The article states that MOc team snapped pictures 10 times sharper than the oringinaland got a natural landform.
It might have been cool that the "Face on Mars" was really real. There are times that we think it was a face but it wasn't took at the right angle to see the face. Somepeople think it was because of the time and date when the picture was taken. They say that the alien markings were hidden by the haze. On a cloudless summer day MGS drew close enough for a second look. When they took the picture on montier it shown that it was lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa.
The "Face on Mars" is a natural landform. When the "Face on Mars" became a pop icon. Alot people thought it was a actually face. They might just send another drone to take another picture just make sure its an natural landform. In my opioion I did not what it was intill I read this article. Now we know that the Face on Mars wasn't a face after all. | 2 |
When the US Constitution was first made, the idea of equality between the states was made. This meant that the size or population of a state gave it no disinct advantage over another. They did this through the creation of the House of Representatives and the Senate, yet there was one more issue they had to solve. This issue was how they could count the votes of citizens all aroun the US fairly. They solved it with electoral college, a system in which the voters don't directly vote for the president, but vote for a group, or slate, of people who have sworn to a canidate who vote for you. This system as Source 2 states can easily be broken with a group of swing votes in some states, but because it keeps thing equal, we must see that making popular vote the process isn't a good idea, because larger states will have more power. The US should just remove the winner take all system and replace it with 'proportional representation" to preserve equality and functionality.
The first reason why we must change to proportional representation is because it preserves equality. As Source 1 states, this proportional representation is only done by Maine and Nebraska, but it makes it so that one party wont win the state, it is reigional in the state meaning that more people are represented through this. The winner take all system is too harsh, and can discount many people in swing and regular states. As Source 3 stated, the larger states need to be left alone to represent the US population. Proportional representation allows this with the ability to include even more opinions. With this informatin, it is easy to see how proportional representation will preserve the equality that popular vote represents.
The second reason why we must change to proportional representation is because it preserves functionality. One of the main arguments for electoral college, is that it is more functional as compared to popular vote. This can be maintained through proportional representation. Source 3 stated that while the reguar electoral college has a chance of failing, it is not as high of a chance as popular vote is. Proportional representation keeps this functionality that those who support normal electoral college hide behind. This is also been proven to work without a hitch. As previously mentioned, Source 1 stated that this for of electoral college is already in Maine and Nebraska. These states have proven that this form of electoral college works, thus proving that we should change to proportional representation in order to maintain the functionality of regular electoral college.
In conclusion, we should switch the rules of electoral college from "winner takes all" to "proportional representation" in order to maintain equality and functionality. showing that while the founding fathers did have the best on their minds when electoral college was made, a change in it can benifit America for years to come. | 3 |
The author gives several points as to why exploring Venus is a good move scientifically. For one, it could provide some information regarding how our planets were formed. Venus is the sister planet to Earth, and as the passage says, it could've once had the capabilities of sustaining life, and exploring it might give some insight on what caused it to become so uninhabitable. The fact that all previous attempts to land spacecraft on Venus, well, didn't work, designing a machine that is able to withstand the harsh conditions that Venus presents is pretty challenging, but
NASA claims it can be done. They say having a vehicle floating abouve the chaos that is Venus' atmosphere would be feasable. we'd also have to take a step back in the technology department. Mechanical computers, which were a huge help in WWll, don't require electronics, but use gears and levers to make calculations. Another possibility is simplified electronics, made from silicon carbide. The simplified devices have been tested in conditions similar to Venus, and lasted for three weeks.
So while exploring Venus will prove to be a great challenge, it can be done. | 2 |
Dear State Senator
My name is Mikayla and I am very concerned about how my president should be elected for the United States. It would be nice to change the election by popular vote for the president of the United States , not keeping the Electoral College. The Electoral College is unfair and should not be used to elect the President of the United States.
The Electoral College has it's issues to why it shouldn't be used to elect the president of the United States. Well for one the Electoral College system "voters vote not for the president , but for a state of electors , who in turn elect the president." In paragraph 10, sentence 4 it states that electors "sometimes" get confused. Why is that you ask? well because the people are picking the wrong candidates.
The electoral college is also unfair to voters. I say this because of the winner take all system in each state. in paragraph 13 , In paragraph 2 it states that canididates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning , they focus only on the tight races in the "swing" states. Personally i wouldn't want to use something like that if its unfair , outdated , and irrational.
We should change the election to popular vote for The President. Why you ask? good question. Well because that way it can be fair and reasonable. And let's not forget the voters wouldn't get confused.
The electoral college should be abolished forever. We should continue from now on by changing to election by popular vote for the president. Popular vote would be fair and everyone would love it. | 2 |
Pollution is one of the most dangerous causes in the world. However, people need the things that pollutes the air. Such as cars, body sprays,etc. I agree that the citizens should limit car usage.
Fuel is one of the causes that pollutes the air. According to the passage,"Diesel fuel was blamed, since france has... a tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline." In addition to that, diesel make up 67 percent of vehicles in france. Compared to a 53.3 percent average engines in the rest of western europe. Robert Duffer states that, "After days of near-record pollution, paris enforced a partical driving ban to clear the air of global city." Motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars home or suffer a 22-euro fine ($31). Moreover, the same goes for odd-numbered plates. With that, the smog cleared enough for the ruling french party.
All the countries should try a car-free day. Andrew Selsky said, "In a program that set to spread to other countries, millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during the car-free day." Some of the advantages of having a car-free day can help make people see that its not about cars or bikes. Even so, Those things are just damaging the air and making it harder to live and breathe. Also stated in the article was that, " It is a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." The day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in Bogota in the mid-1990s. Uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by board, smooth sidewalks; rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic. Futhermore, it would help so people can see the world without cars and not pollute the air.
By giving some of the dangerous stuff that we use daily a break. We will see great turn outs and good things happen. Like, less traffic which means less accidents, less fuel used which means less pollution. Lets all help keep our country safe and clean. STOP POLLUTION! I firmly agree that citizens should limit car usage. | 2 |
Have you ever seen Europe? What about China, or the Acropolis in Greece? Have you seen Venice, Italy, or the Panama Canal? If you've ever wanted to do those things, and help a lot of people while doing it, you're Seagoing Cowboy material. You should become a Seagoing Cowboy because of the hard work it teaches, the experience, and because you're supporting other countries, as well as your own!
First of all, we have the grueling hard work to speak of. Some may say that grueling hard work is not a reason to volunteer for something, but I disagree. Being a Seagoing Cowboy is nothing like a normal, boring life. Yes, you have hard work, but you get the greatest sense of satisfaction once you're done. You get to know that all your hard work has gone to helping people in need, and that you've really made a mark on this world. I think hard work is also the path to knowledge, and you may just learn some life lessons along the way.
Secondly, the fantastic experience is what we will cover. Some people may argue that the experience isn't worth risking your life over, but in reality, it's quite the contrary. If you're a Seagoing Cowboy, you get to travel the world, like I mentioned. You can see places like Greece, Italy, and China. Also, don't forget their unforgetable landmarks that you will see! Not only do you get to travel the world, but this is a once in a lifetime experience! We won't be around forever! Plus, I bet it will make one heck of a story to tell your grandchildren, am I right?
Finally, we have the service you are providing. Some may say you are better off in the military. This may be so, but would you rather be taking lives, or saving them? Plus, us Seagoing Cowboys were only created because of World War II to clean up the mess. Wouldn't it be counterproductive to start a World War III? Here, you get to help people, improve lives, and do good for your country, and the country you're in. I think that with more of us Seagoing Cowboys, we can make the world a better place.
Us Seagoing Cowboys know how to work hard, experienced a once in a lifetime chance, and supported our and many other countries. We've seen Europe, China, Greece, Italy, and even Panama! We've traveled the world, crossing oceans to and fro, for the good of mankind. So, what are you waiting for? Sign up today! | 3 |
If you like to help people out the Seagoing Cowboy program is one you must join. There are many great reasons why you should join the Seagoing Cowboys so I thought of two reasons why. The first reason you should join the Seagoing Cowboys is because It's a good chance for you and others to help the people that are in need. Another reason why you should join the Seagoing Cowboys is that you get to explore and learn new things along the way,and according to the author It could be a opportunity of a lifetime for you.
According to the article the author said "Luke Bomberger had no idea that his life would change soon after his high school graduation" and "Luke couldn't say no. He knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime." The author also says "But being a Seagoing Cowboy was much more than an adventure for Luke Bomberger. It opened up the world to him" and "It made me more aware of people of othert countries and their needs."
Being in the Seagoing Cowboys could be amazing for you. You not only get to help save lives but you also get to explore and learn new things along the way. Not only do you get to do that but you also have the chance to go to many places and meet many people and the impact it has on the world is just amazing. Those are all reasons why you and your friends or family should join the Seagoing Cowboys. | 1 |
Americans throughout the country believe that the Electoral College isn't fair and believe that they deserve a more direct voting syste to the president, other than voting for electors. These reasons are made by the people because they want more and more power in the government. What the people want is almost always the risky option, especially when the topic is government. I believe that the Electoral College should be kept as the way it is now, and not a direct voting system for American citizens.
As said in the previous statement, Americans that want the Electoral College gone are lurking for more power when it comes to rules. Unfortunately, if the government's decisions were left in the hands of the people, the country's state would be in anarchy. On the other hand, the electoral college offers Congress and the Senate a share of the power, and the American citizens a share of the power as well. For example, if the Electoral College began to diminish, then became wiped out immediately, the government could do nothing less but to watch as the people choose the president that they want. Sometimes, what is wanted by the people may not always be the right thing.
Moving on, almost 60 percent of all American voters stated that they would rather have a direct voting system, putting aside the Electoral College. What most people are not seeing is that the direct voting and Electoral College system are very similar. The difference between the two is, that when Americans vote in the Electoral College, they are voting for electors that go towards the president, and when Americans vote directly to the president, those same amount of votes go to the president as well. If the voting system was based off of a direct route to the presidents side, then there would be too many votes to count, which is why have representatives towards each state is one of the glories of the Electoral College.
Finally, the popular voting system is very flawed, considering that there are states that have millions more people people than others. Some states even double the size of other states according to population. For example, New York's population most likely doubles the population of Florida's, but thanks to the Electoral College, the representative and population ratio weighs out, giving each state an equal amount of votes toward their president. Now, if the popular voting system was in place, then states like New York would outnumber states like Florida's votes by millions. It would not be as fair as it is now if the popular voting system replaced the Electoral College.
In conclusion, the Electoral Colllege has many positive outlooks like keeping the voting system fair and not giving too much power to either side when voting is the subject. Although many Americans believe that the Elecotral College is causing the wrong presidents to win, it does not make a difference either way because of the way that the Electoral College evens out the votes. The Electoral College is a fair and suitable system for the United States and should be kept as America's voting system be | 3 |
Marlenne M
ISTEP
ENG 10 Part 1
28 February 2019
Dangerous and Venus
Venus could be one of the best planets although its name is "Evening Star" and making it one of the brightest points of light in the sky. Venus is reallly important to our scientists. Venus out of all our planets looks more like our planet Earth. Meaning, it has a lot of characterists that Earth has. Although, Venus seems like it's the closest similar we have to Earth, it is indeed dangerous. Knowing that Venus is really dangerous NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus.
As, I said in my previous paragraph Venus has many characterists that are similer to Earth. Also, scientists actually believe that many years ago Venus was covered largely with oceans and could supported various forms of life, just like Earth. Venus is actually referred to as Earth's "twin." They both are extreme close to density and size. Out of the all the planets scientists are really intrieged to discover new things on Venus and maybe even find out what Venus was like years ago. They can probably even prove their hypothesis that Venus had oceans and various living things.
Dangerous isn't even the word for explaining Venus. Venus is the second planet from our sun. Making it slighty challenging to examine more clsely. Most people would think this is why we aren't able to step foot on Venus but Venus has more diffcult problems then just being super close to the sun. As stated in the text, " Earth, Venus, and Mars, our other planetary meighbor,orbit the sun at different speeds. These differences in speed mean that sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus." Some humans have been sent to venus but never managed to stay alive.
Even though Venus can be life-threatening, our scientists won't give up. They are fascinated by Venus. Even today Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. "The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. Venus can sometimes be our neartest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel." What this means is that scientists are looking further into second choices in case Earth one day is ruined by something or even humans.That being said if Venus is the the nearest option we have than NASA should try and do everything to be able to explore the planet 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."
In conculsion, NASA will find a way for scientists to be able to study and even so make the planet Venus livable. If NASA is working on some simplified electronics made of slicon carbide then of course one day humans will be able to even travel to Venus. Dangerous but never enough to stop our curiosity. Earth should always have a second option incase something goes wrong, and if NASA believes that Venus has life then I do believe so too. If they were able to get a man on the moon, then they will be able to study and explore Venus no matter how dangerous it is. | 3 |
The use of this technology in a classroom would be useful because it can help teachers identify how a student is feeling, if the are confused, and if the need help. For example," a classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," Dr. huang predicts. " Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instrucuture." This is really helpful to some students because when taking an online lesson some of them might be comfused and the teacher is no there to help. So the computer can take these facial expresions and modify the lesson so you could undestand it better. This also follows along if a student needs help with the lesson, the computer could see you are having a hard time and t to help you by changing the lesson.
Also it could help teachers identify emotions by the facial expresion. "You can tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face. Of course most of us would have trouble actually describing each facial trait."
If the student is acting up the teacher can use this new technology to see if the student is sad or angry. Then she can ask the student if everthing is okay or if he needs to talk to someone.
In conclusion the new technology would be usful in a classroom because it can help teachers identify how a student if feeling, if they are confused, and if they need help. | 2 |
Driverless cars are defintiely something that not only will make lives much easier, but will also make traveling in a car much safer. The introduction of them is revolutionary, and soon, lawmakers will not have a case to ban them from being used. With these cars, human civilization will be changed forever, for the better. Driverless cars are the future of luxury and safety in automobiles.
First of all, the cars could make lives exponentially easier and more luxurious. With the task of having to drive themselves, people could take driving as a time to relax and think. As stated in the article, there could also be entertainment systems in the cars themselves such as televisions, gaming consoles, and computers. So long as the devices are ot operable anytime the car requires human input, there would be no safety issue involved, and may even serve as a safety feature, alerting drivers of possible imminent danger.
Next, safety in driving would be increased to a near accident-free point. With every car making safe, legal turns, following the government mandated speed limit, and using a GPS to ensure following a safe path, how could any accidents even occur? The only cause of an accident would be a malfunction in the vehicle, which is very rare in even today's cars. Human error would be almost completely eliminated, making today's cars seem like deathtraps compared to driverless ones.
In conclusion, these cars would bring a new level of safety and entertainment to people's lives, maing the highways cleaner and the driver's seat more enjoyable. With driverless cars just ahead in the future, human civilization will be drastically in day-to-day life for the better. | 3 |
Hello! Today you problem feel super board with nothing to do,but you really love adventure. I know what to do I'll tell you what my friend Luke's friend did for him. Lucks friend Don Reist invited him to toto Europe on a cattle boat. Luke said yes, and began a whole new adventure. You know that a cattle boat is not as bad as it sounds. You should tell yourself should I.
Here are a few reasons why you should consider going.
<It would be a lot of fun
< You love trying new things
<You also like adventure,and trust this is a chance of a life time at least Luke thinks so.
You should remember that these are only a few reasons to try there are tons of more were that came from. I would tell you,but I'm kinda in the middle of taking a HUGE test. I don't wanna spend my time doing that. I want you to at least consider it. I think you could be the best cowboy or cowgirl who rides the waves ever.
This is my conclusion I really hope I have convinced you to try riding the waves if I haven't at least try new things,and never stop be leaving that you can't. You have the world to explore. You are an adventurer,and I can't wait to explore what cool things you can do to like our amazing world. | 0 |
Drivelss cars should not be developed because they can cause accidents, they can cause the driver not to pay attetnion, and they would cost more.
Drivelss cars aren't really driveless. At certain points they will need the drivers assistance. This can lead to many accidents. In paragraph 9, the text states "most driving laws focus on keeping dirvers, passengers, and pedestrians safe, and lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers." The sentence proves that driveless cars may not be completely safe. The driver could depend on the car to drive itself and not be paying attention which can result in accidents. In paragraph 9, it also states that it is illegal to even test computer-driven cars. Something would not be illegal if it's comepletely safe.
Another reason driveless cars should not be developed is becasue they can cause the drive not to pay attention. Driveless cars would be like phones. They made driving and texting illegal because it made the drivers not pay attention and caused many death and accidents. The same result can come form drivelss cars. They can be a great distraction becasue the driver would think that the car can drive itlsef and they would not pay attention. From that conclusion, in paragraph 9, the question "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault- the driver or the manufacturer" would come up. Who would be responsible? If the driver belived the car can drive itself and the techonology failed, it can lead to death because the driver might not be paying attention. The driver would think the car doesn't need a driver and when the techonology fails and the car spins out of control, many lives could be lost.
Driveless cars would also cost more money in many things. The cost to buy would most likely be more expensive. If drivelessc cars started being in use, there would need to be new signs that fit those specific cars. Driveless cars would aslo need specific shops and equipment. If something goes wrong you would need to get it fixed and the technology used makes it more expensive. Fixing a car is already expensive. You have to buy whatever it is you need to fix and then take it to a shop. If something in the techonology of a driveless car goes wrong and you need to get it fixed, it will denifitely cost more.
Causing accidents, causing the driver not to pay attention, and costing more are reasons why driveless cars should not be developed. | 3 |
The Challenge of Exploring Venus is an article written by an author. The author uses a lot of evidence to support his claim that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents.For example the author says that NASA should invent a "blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the rolling Venusian landscape"
This
is a genius suggestion. This could work because the vehicle would not be touching the hot surface but just hovering above enough for us to even get a glimpse of what the inside of Venus looks like.
The author also states that NASA is thinking of using mecahnical computers. These computers existed in the 1800's and were important in World War II" The new computers would just explode because of the heat and pressure Venus produces. The mecahnical computers would work very well.
The writer did an awesome job of supporting the idea that "Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents." I hope these things are invented or allowed so that astronounts can visit Venus and the world can finally know what exists deep inside Venus. | 1 |
According to the text the challenge of exploring Venus is really worthy for NASA to explore or to know more about because all people know about venus is that Venus is really hot, nobody can go to venus.
The challenge of exploring venus is a pretty big challenge. Copious factors contribute Venus's reputation as a challenging planet for human to explore. Venus is the closest planet to earth why not find a way to explore it, Human have sent a copious of spacecraft in Venus but none of them survive the landing for more than a couple hours. Which is why we should find a way to get to Venus.
Venus as a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide makes it more challenging. Venus has a temperature of 800 degrees which is really high it's 90 times greater than our planet which make Venus really hot and challenging to explore. Venus condition is far more extreme than any human coud have imagine. If Venus is so inhospitable why is are scientist discussing on further visit to Venus? Maybe it's because it could be the only planet that is like earth, no one knows, which is why we have to know more about Venus no matter what it takes.
NASA has one idea for sending human to study Venus their idea is to fly over 30 or so miles above Venus, which sound like good idea because our pilots do it almost everyday to survive a storm while their flying a plane. More importantly, researchers cannot take a samples of rock or gas or anything else from a distance. Therefore they are trying to find a way to land on venus and take a good look so that they can know a little more about Venus our sister planet. Many of our researchers are working on a big project that would allow are machines last longer on Venus because Venus it's really hot.
The Challenge of exploring Venus is a big challenge, i think we will find a way to get to venus because if we got a lot of thing we got to know about our sister planet. | 3 |
Dear senator, the way we elect this countries president is flawed and un-effective. We technically don't directly vote for the president, we vote for some person who then chooses the president. Since this contry is democratic it think that the popular vote is definitly the way to elect the future presidents.
To start off,the electoral college isnt fair to voters because candidates only go to states where they know they will get the vote. In the article "The indefensible Electoral College:Why even the best-laid defenses of the systemare wrong" it says "The electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates don't spend time in the states they know they have no chance at winning". People vote for the person who they want to be in office not for someone who might vote for the person who you want. I guess you could say voters in swing states are going to know more about the election. But you never know that does not always happen.
Secondly the eclectors could be anyone and could be chosen by anybody,there are no kind of qualifications. On the other hand the regular voters actuaully have to meet some sort of standards like you aren't allowed to vote if you have commited some sort of crime a certain amount times. And most of the time the American people dont see adds or commercials about the electorates. Howdo we know we can trust these random people with our vote? In my eyes and probably most peoples eyes, see this system as a non-democratic way to vote for our president.
To conclude our country should switch to the popular vote system strictly because the elctoral college is an unfair, un-democratic way of choosing our nations future leader. | 2 |
To me, self-driving cars represent the most obvious step towards a safer, more efficient future in driving. Of course, the idea seems appealing. After all, who doesn't want someone to drive for them while they're stuck in rush-hour traffic? But we have to more closely analyse the laws, ethics, and safety aspects before moving full-steam ahead into what could possibly be the future of driving.
Self-driving cars have a lot of potential for both public and private use. This type of technology could be a major hit on the consumer market. Self-driving cars could take the most tedious part out of road trips or decrease the number of traffic cops we have to employ under government pay. One of the most appealing aspects for lawmakers and voters is the increased safety of self-driving cars. This is one of the most heavily argued topics in the entire debate over self-driving cars, even though Google's cars have been operating for over half a million miles with only a handful of minor accidents. One of the other pros that isn't mentioned nearly as much is the increased efficiency of high-traffic areas. Self-driving cars are smarter at merging and driving in dense traffic, meaning rush-hour traffic jams could one day be a thing of the past.
The other side of the debate for self driving cars is public transportation. Uber is already planning a self-driving taxi service, and other companies are sure to follow. Self-driving buses could also be used with schools or in major cities. Having a fully automated public transport system could make modern cities more efficient than they've ever been.
Unfortunately, many of these same benefits offered by self-driving cars have a negative alter-ego. One of the major effects of increased automation is increased efficiency. However, as we move towards a fully automated world, we lose a lot of jobs in unspecialised industries. Laws would also have to be reworked for nearly every aspect of the traffic system. How and why would teenage drivers take a driving test if they're never going to have to drive a car? Will human drivers and AI drivers fall under the same category in the eyes of the law? There are still years and years of legal red tape that has to be cut through before self-driving cars can even make it onto the consumer market. In addition, there are soem ethical problems involved with programming self-driving cars. Programmers and developers could be a fault for deaths caused by bugs in their program. And what should you do if a crash is unavoidable? Should you sacrifice the passenger to save a pedestrian?
As a result, I believe that self-driving cars can and should someday be a part of our everyday lives. However, dozens of laws will have to be rewritten, commities formed, and lawsuits fought before we can even judge automated cars under the same laws we judge human drivers. There is a huge amount of potential for a faster, safer, more enjoyable traffic system, and it lies in self-driving cars. But, for us to be able to implement any of it, we need to make some very difficult decisions. | 3 |
The author has a lot of background knowledge of Venus. The author supports their idea very well, making it easy to understand where he/she is coming from. The author puts in facts, opinions, and really gives the readers an understanding of why exploring Venus would be worth the danger.
The author states many facts to help their article thrive. They list all the reasons why it would be a good idea and what the dangers would be with going forth with exploring Venus. There are many different dangerous things that come with Venus.
First of all, the article states that Venus has the "hottest surface temperature of any planet in the solar system...
800 degrees Fahrenheit" meaning that even metal would melt on Venus. Not only the horrible heat, but it's made up of about 97 percent of carbon dioxide. Venus is just not the right place to get a hands-on experience with.
However, Venus is the "twin" of Earth. Meaning that they are close to the same shape and size. The only reason studying Venus would be worth it is because it could of been another Earth at one point. "Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth" states the article. Which means that it is something to look inot. Possibly once having life on another planet other than Earth? That's a big deal. NASA can find out more about our Earth if they were able to actaully discover Venus.
Concluding this, I do not believe that we would ever really be able to find out much about Venus. All of the spacecrafts sent there have not lasted, the atmosphere is too complicated, and it would be to much work for little to no pay off. Yes, it would be nice to understand more and discover something that hasn't been done before. All in all it just doesn't seem possible. Even if the scientists were to float above Venus it just wouldn't be enough. They wouldn't be able to get samples, get a lay of the land, or even really good pictures for that matter. The author did put in some good facts on why we should and the dangers, it just doens't seem possible at the moment. | 2 |
Technology has been vastly improving these past couple of years. With all these new technological improvements it can also play a major factor in classrooms. All teenagers these days are very "tech-friendly". Therefore it would only make sense that we should incorporate some of these technological adavances
into the classroom so students could be more engaged during class. It would greatly improve many homework scores, quiz scores, and even test scores
thus overall having many improvements to their grades in all.
The new software " Facial Action Coding System" has been a huge technological improvement to this time.
In the passage it states " Using video imagery, the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movements---in a real face or in the painted face of Mona Lisa. By weighting the different units, the software can even identify mixed emotion." This can show how in a classroom if students are being active during a lesson and participating. Or if they are dozing off somewhere else with the help of this technology then the computer can change its algorithms to change how the lesson is being taught therefore making the student pay attention during class.
In a classroom filled with some kids that just can't focus and/or do not understand then this technology can come into great use. "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," the passage states. This technology could help students that have trouble with some classes or just are not paying attention whatsoever, in the passages it also states,
"Then it can modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." With this technology it can highly improve on keeping the students attention at all times, this can help the students with making sure they know whats going on during class at all times instead of zoning out then missing something very cruical and overall messing alot of things up but instead keeping them highly engaged at all times.
In conclusion the use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is greatly valuable. The use of this technological advancement would greatly improve students comprehension of some classes in school that they might've not understood before. It would be more personalized to that specific person, the more confused you look the more different ways it would look to make sure you understand the concept. Thus making the student very proactive and improving their overall grade. | 2 |
As it shows in the article "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars", towns or cities like the experimental town of Vauban, Germany, are capable of continuing life without the added stress of owning a car and lowering the greenhouse emissions caused by them. Although the majority of the citizens do not own a vehicle, there are about 30 percent who do, and those who don't, either ride a bicycle or on what little amount public transportation there is. Out of the 70 percent of Vauban's families that do not own a car, 57 percent sold theirs to move there.
Areas all around the world are beginnig to do the same as Vauban. Creating areas that do not require vehicles mainly due to the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that are causing the majority of the worlds climate change. Even in Paris they are beginning to cut back on vehicle usage due to large amounts of smog. In 2014, Smog in Paris measured 147 micrograms of particulate matter (PM) per cubic meter which is more than other European capitals with Brussels at 114 and 79.7 in London. | 1 |
Have you ever wondered what your emotions were like in an old picture.
This article states that the monalisa was tested to see how happy, disgusted, fearful, and angry.
This new technology could be useful but not all that tactical.
This new technology is mostly likely not very expensive but it is not very useful if it can only be used as an emotion finder.
I believe that this technology for the emotion dectected is basically useless and a waste of money.
This technology to detect emotion is quite weird to spend money on what humans can find out.
If you look at a picture then you should be able to see what emotions they are feeling.
The information that humans could gather would not be as precise as the computers but maybe it would be more accurate.
There are a couple good reasons why you should have this new technology.
this because because of how it decifered the emotions of the monalisa very accuratly.
Such as the 83% happy,9% disgusted, 6% fearful, and 2% angry.
This information could not be desifered by a human eye.
In conclusion, I believe that this technology is a waste of money and the idea of it should be thrown away.
This is because while someone was wasting their time on a emotion detecter they could have been spending that time on something like better computers or faster computers.
They could have done something better than waste their time and resources on something that humans can do for this technology. | 1 |
on the earth cars or any motored vechle are generally accepted due to how long we have had them in our society. Cars are creating green house gases that are polluting the earth. in the France cars have been banned and have lead to geat things. Making suburbs much more compact then they are right now will lead to less car usage.
"All of our development since World war 2 has been centered on car,and that will have to change" said David goldberg, an official of transportation for America. but nothing has gotten better since all this years. pollution of greenhouse gases in the uk are up to 12 percent and in the united states an estimate of atleast 50 percent in most car intensive areas. Mr. goldberg also stated "how much you drive is as important as whether you have a hybrid" which is also something that is not taken into account.
In paris there had a offical ban from drving your cars, people who were caught driving cars were fined up to 22-euro($31).Cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emisssions. Caris typically has more smog than other european capitals with paris having up to 147 micro grams of particulate matter (pm) per cubic meter compared with 114 in brussels and 79.7 in london, reuters found. Congestion was down 60% after just five-days of intensifying smog which even rivaled places such beijing and china.
Suburbs and cities are very wide leading to one of the main reasons for motored-vechile. But there have been efforts in the last two decades to make cities denser which have lead to greatly less car usasge. Places like vauban,home to 5,500 residents within a rectangular square mile. Vauban having made its suburbs compact and public transportantion has lead to it being a very well success.
People do not understand what effects cars are having on the world but hopefully them will before this issues go even farther. With cars creating greenhouse gases that are destroying the atmosphere in large sections of are planet. But places such as paris have been finally trying to make a differences and put a partial ban on cars. and one of the best ways could be to make cities and suburbs more compact. Hopefully now you have taken something away from this. | 1 |
driveless cars are better then manual driving cars. Driveless cars are the future and they have been a long time in the making. What if you needed to drive a long distance? woulden't it be better to sit back and let the car do the work? with a driveless car you can multi-task while your car is driving. For example, you can watch a movie, read a book, and even text while driving, and it will be completely safe.
driveless cars are safer than manual driven cars. texting and driving is a huge cause of death for teens in the US. With a driveless cars teens will be able to text thier friend or answer that important text, without running the risk of loosing their life or their car. Driveless cars will be able to sense things that the naked eye will not be able to sense. people get hit by cars all the time and kids get run over, with a driveless car those kind of things will never happen because of the state of the art sensors built in on the driveless cars.
in conclusion, driveless cars are safer, and better then manual driven cars. Driveless cars should be implemented as soon as possible to advance our society. The manual driven car has been around since the 1900's and it is time for it to go, just like black and white televisions. I envison a world without any kind of car related deaths, a world with less road rage, and overall a much more happy world once driveless cars are fully implemented. This is not to far away. | 2 |
We were up is space circling Mars snapping pictures and trying to find a landing spot for our sister ship Viking 2. Then we had noctice that in one of he pictures there was likeness of a human face. The head of the face was two miles from end to end. So we decide to send the picture back to NASA to see what they had to say about it. There replies where so shocking to us we could not belive it they that the face had been created by aliens.
Our first reponse to them was that it was simply not possible because aliens do not exist. Even if they did we did not think that it was going to be possible for them to do something like this.
Our second reason we do not think it was aliens was because they would not have the brians to do this. They would not be able to calculate the right measurments and angles also. Plus we dont think they would be able to survive on Mars because of the conditions that are there. These aliens would just have to be out right smart to do something like this. This is just one of those things that seem impossible for an alien to do.
The third and final reason is the point we are trying to get across to you guys and that is that we think is just a natural land form that formed while the planet was being created. If we are being logical here we know that the pyrimads were created by humans them selves but do really think an alien could have done this? We do not think so because they are just not as smart and and not as equpit as a human is. We think that it was a land form God decided to give the planet.
To wrap up everything about this mysterious face maybe it was created by aliens but we may never know because this face is on a planet where a human would not be able to live and survive to witness the aliens build it. The only people that might have got a chance to witness it is atrounauts that would have been up in space at the time. We personally think that it is safe to say that God decided to give mars this mysterious land form and not aliens. | 1 |
The thing about the face is, everyone was hoping for a Martian. Thats why so many people were still not saticefied when they saw the second. It isn'tg easy, you know. They all have to do extremely hard work to just get a glimpse at the "Face." We have done multiple photos of the face and around the face. If we were trying to hide something, why would we show it to everyone? Those are the crazy things I'm talking about. Un-needed sceptics and conspiracy theorists to question the goals of NASA as a whole, just because we found this and shared it with the world.
There are forms like this all over the world. You can find formations like this anywhere, like in deserts, on rocks, theres no end to it! You can find unusual formations all over the world. However, when its another world, its a completely different story? No. Mars is a desert, and why cant formations like this be found there? The truth is they can. This just seemed interesting so we wanted to share your possible discovery with the world. NASA would have loved to find out that it was a Martian, but that wasn't the case.
The article states people who have seen things like that in the desert. There are multiple whitnesses of that. So in the conclusion of my arguement, I'd like to state, that I believe, and you should to, that the "Face" on Mars, Is just a natural formation on the planets amazing surface. | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.