full_text stringlengths 737 20.5k | score int64 0 5 |
|---|---|
the author using specfic details from studies and historical records to create a claim about how exploring venus is hard due to the harsh conditions kn the planet but he also comes up with idea of exploring venus from the sky in blimp like vechile to avoid the harsh ground enviroment. solution to the hostile conditions "
"on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape. Just as our jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. At thirty-plus miles above the surface, "
"the challenge of exploring venus"
the author also descripes how the the in human condions such as the lack of oxygen, high pressure, extreme heat and erupting volancoes, powerfull earth wuakes and frequent lighting strikes are the reasons why no manned missions to venus had, are , or will ever take place.
" A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venuss atmosphere. On the planets surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals. Also notable, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun. Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface."
Challenge of Exploring Venus. | 1 |
Venus, a planet that neighbors Earth that can also becalled Earth's twin, not because of them both looking the same, but in term of density and size. The author suggested that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents for us. You may be able to ee it from a distance but getting on it is a whole other challenge.
Earth alternates being closer to Mars or Venus, humans have sent spacecraft to land on Venus but are failed due to the fact that no spacecraft has ever succesfully landed and survived. The atmosphere around Venus is almost 97 percent carbon dioxide, and surroning it are clouds of highly corrosive sulfric acid in the atmosphere. It states that "On average the temeperature of the planets surface is 800 degress Fahrenheit and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greated than what we experience on our own planet". Compared to what we feel on Earth humans adaptablity cannot match with the intense surface and temperature of Venus having even the power to crush a submarine, known for diving to the deepest part of our oceans and can even have the ablility of liquefying many metals. Having said that, Venus not even being the closest to the sun has the highest surface temperature and with thr high pressure and heat it had additional impediments that we as humans can not adapt to our work with.
Venus has been known to be the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Assumptions being made say that Venus was like Earth with forms of life and having oceans cover it just like Earth. To this day it has some of the features that Earth has and being on how close it is it can be our nearest option for space visit. NASA has had an idea on how to study Venus "a blimp like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape. Just as our jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditons by staying up and out of their way". By being above the surface the air pressure would match the sea level for Earth's solar power and radiation would not go past Earth's levels. The conditions not being easy but survivable for humans.
To this day scientists are seeking to conduct a mission on how to get onto Venus and understand it regardless of the risks. Having tested products like simple electronics, they have made a chamber simulating the time and estimating on how long it would last to stay on Venus's surface and have lasted three weeks in the conditions Venus is made up in. Even with danger in the explration it should let us expand our reach to get closer to Venus. Seeing on how much work and effort people put into the discovery of a new planet shows that with time and innovation we can succeed in exploring Venus and what new things they can discover. | 2 |
Driverless cars should not be developed into an actual invention. For their are many negative reasons why they shouldnt be. A driverless car is a pointless waste of time.
For a driverless car to be driver less it must not have a driver. Well according to paragraph 7 it states," In fact, none of the cars developed so far are completely driverless. They can steer, accelerate, and brake themeselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents, this must mean the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requres." Why develope driverless cars that still need driver? Secondly, in paragraph for the list the gear mounted on the car. " Google's modified Toyota Prius uses position-
estimiating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview miror, four auto motive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor. The most important bit of technolopgy in this syster is the spinning sensor on the roof. Dubbed LIDAR." A regular car requires simple parts at times such as a spark plug or a new battery perhaps some oil. If every car was to be replaced by driverless cars, who would have to pay for replacement parts the owner or the manufactuer. I guarantee you none of those parts are remotely cheap. Currently out of the various models of driverless cars one with potential was started by engineers at Berkeley, but their model requires roads to be updated as well with magnets to alternate polarity. That would be alright but it would be an unpractical amount of money that taxes wouldn't help pay for much.
So in conclusion, due to the fact of the lawful consequences in case of an accident, high cost replacement parts and the unpractical amount of money for the updating of roads for driverless cars doesnt seem all the much worth it in the long run. Plus is it really safe to let computers drive a potentially deadly vehicle. | 2 |
Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The author shows this by referring Venus as Earth's "twin", nearest option for a planetary visit, and travels not being limited.
The author says that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents and by showing that this is true he refers Venus as Earth's twin. The author goes to say that, "Often referred to as Earth's 'twin,' Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too." The author also gives an example on why it isn't Earth's twin. "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals." These pieces of evidence show the real dangers of Venus and it's environment.
The nearest option for a planetary visit is Venus. The author says, "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." He also goes to say that, "Furthermore, recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel." With these pieces of evidehce it shows that the planet shows features of planet movement.
The last thing is travels should not be limited. The author says, "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosty will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." The author also comments, "Out 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." Not limiting travles can expand reasearch and these pieces of evidence show that they want to do what it takes to study this planet.
In conclusion, these are the reasons why studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. | 2 |
Introducing driverless cars to today's society would be a very big step in technology. Though it would be a big step, it would not be a step in the right direction.
They have yet to create a car that can fully operate on its own. there are too many sensors needed in order to safely use a driverless car, such as video cameras mounted near the rearview mirror, automotive radar sensors, and a dubbed LIDAR. With all of the sensors needed, one could stop working while the car is in motion putting the passenger in danger.
Conflicts between the users of the driverless cars and the manufaturers would be in presence often. The user of the car may often find problems that he or she cannot fix themselves and would have to spend a lot more money to take it in to get fixed. The users might also come to a stituation where the car is in condition to where it cannot get fixed and then have to buy a new car, causing thaty person to spend more money.
Putting Driverless cars on the road will put people in more danger. Users and manufacturers will not have a trustworthy relationship and people would spend more money than they do on regular cars. | 1 |
to my opinion i think that we should not be practiceing to find out a eay if we could use a computure to read our emotional expressions. to my point of view as a student i woldnt like if s computure would look at me nd say oh shes feeling happy. because computers does not have a soul do when i hear that they should have computures to se if they can read emotions well i think thats is redundunt. now as they said in the story paragraph 3 sentence one, they can begin the process when the computure constructs a 3-D computure model f the face; all 44 major musclesin the modela must move like a human muscles. now in other words make a robot that looks exactly like a human and can do human things. i think that why are we trying to make robots to be like human do we serously want another thing on this planet that might ruin it even more. now some people believe that we should have robots to help us etc. but they also say what if they become evil and they go against us and take over the world and kill us all. i think that if they ever make robots and that were to happen then it was all planned because this bings me back to my point. robots dont have souls which means that they cant procces haterate in them. unless they were programed to feel hate but they are sensative so if they actually learn how scientist wants them to learn then i believe that they still wouldnt take over the world unless they were programed to. i think that if a student actually thinks that it would be nice to have the computure read your emotions and you could talk to it and stuff then i feel lik that would seperte our world even moe ut this time is seperate from eachother from our closest friends and family because they would become our friends and they will become our family. i think if you want to end bulling and family problems etc. then is still not a good idea. like i said this still leads to segragation within ourseleves. so if ou ask me do you think that we should make robots to read our emotions. i would just simply say no its to complicated and learn to comunicate with people to fix problems and dont try to be the ruler of evrything cause you will fail and if the world ends ill blame it on you. | 1 |
Driverless cars are cars that drive on its own and you do not have to control it what so ever. Google has had these cars ever since 2009. They are said that these cars are all working from the computer and the manufacturers. These cars seem to have a lot of benifts, but at the same time, there are many downsides to these driverless cars. These cars seem pretty troublesome with things such as conflict, lack of attention, and the roads.
Driverless cars can start a lot of arguments. Suppose you got in a car crash while using one of these driverless cars. Who's fault would that be, the driver or the manufacturer? It could be said that it is the driver because they were not paying enough attention to the car and roads and it is their fault that they did not control it. Then again, it could also be said that it is the manufacturers fault because they could have engineered it wrong and it have some flaws.
Another downside about driverless cars is the lack of attention that some people will have when looking out for the roads. People are lazy, and when they hear the word driverless cars, they automatticaly assume that they will not have to do any work and will just sit back and relax. This leads to people not paying attention to the road and not dealing with the car when the car alerts it to take control.
As said in the article, not only do you have to have smart cars, but you will also need to have smart roads. This is imossible to do because you can not go aroung changing every road, it would cost too much and take forever. Now it is said that the solution to this is that you would just have to make smarter cars, but how smart can they get? It will be most likely that there will be some roads that the car is just not smart enough to do.
In conclusion, diverless cars are not what they are cut out to be. The arguments that would arise, the lack of attention, and apparently the 'dumb' roads are only a handful of downsides and issues of the driverless car. Is it really worth so much when you yourself can just drive? Many people in this day drive and it is not such a big deal. We can not resort to even more lazier ways when the computer does all the work. We soon will just be doing nothing and electronics will be doing everything for us. And it comes to say, how much smarter can a car get? | 3 |
Cars. They're a simply luxuary that you can find anywhere from driveways to parking lots to just parked right out on the street. Nobody ever thinks twice about driving their car, after all they get us where we need to go in a quick amount of time. However, cars could be the most deadliest thing in the world, and it sits right next to our houses. From the exhaust fumes that fumigate in the air all the way to obiesity, cars are just a silent killer waiting in the shadows.
Now, a car isn't really out to kill us, at least not intentionally, but unfortunatly the worst thing about a car is behind it; the exhaust. A couple hundreds of chemicals float out into the air and slowly kill the Earth's ozone layer. Every year the Earth gets hotter and hotter as the ozone layer becomes thinner as more cars end up on the road. It really is just a domino effect thats still in the process of tumbling down. The reason why we don't think too much on it, is simply because as we sit in air conditioned cars, we don't notice just how hot it really is. But what happens when the ozone layer is completely destroyed? Well, just hope your wheels don't melt down into the pavement while your driving.
A cars bad streak doesn't end with making the Earth into a giant sauna, of course some people might like the idea, but what if our cars, were the reason our diet never works? As more cars end up on the road, less people are walking and biking to get places. Even now, more teenagers are on the road with cheeper and more efficient cars which means that combined with a teens natural laziness in everyday life, its like we've been giving a robot to replace our legs. Would you believe that some people would drive their cars just to get a few blocks up the street? It's absolutly tragic, almost as if we're just waiting for the end scene in a horror movie.
So, even though cars may not be waiting for us outside our showers with a knife, it's slowly destroying the planet as well as our health. However there are solutions such as carpooling, taking the bus or even walking or biking more. Carpooling lessens the amount of exhaust fumes on the road, and walking keeps our cardio up and is even just enjoyable. So before you grab your car keys and head out the door, just take a look into the sky and a quick glance at yourself and think "do I really want to be overweight in a sauna?" | 2 |
The technogy that there using it looks wonderful explain every single details how the techonology works and how the testing are. It explain that they make a machine that can read face and pictures just like the Mona Lisa face, they describe that
Mona lisa have 83 percent happy , 9 percent disgusting, 6 percent fearful and 2 percent angry. They explain this just because of a software computer read Mona Lisa face.
The coumputers are very smart at this time but a computer that reads face is a little bit complicated because they can do almost everything that a human wants but reading face is not so hard. Using technology to read emotions expressions of students in classroom is not so good because students can read faces too. A lot of people can read faces even if your mad or not people can see emotional in other faces .
The process of the software computer begin when the computer constructus a 3-D computer model of the face. it explain that thhe computer jus move muscle and the way faces move like in paragraph 3 describe " all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. Movement of one or more muscles is called an action unit ". this mean that they read the muscle in the face to explain what motion humans do.
Reading faces is not so hard you can see people if they are happy,angry or sad is not so hard if see someone laughing you can tell that the person is happy or something make happy that person, like in the artticle say " In fact, we humas perform this same impressive " calculation " every day . For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." this mean that most people can show feelings on their face. Of course some people have trouble to describe faces because some people doesn't show feelings and other do.
How people feel it depends on them. most people are happy and others sad but every single people can be happy it depends on them not in other persons. The people that are always happy are the ones who thinks positive the ones that love their self a machine can read their faces but the machine doesn't know that humans can change their mind in less than an minute we can be happy and then we can be sad for a sad news but for the computer it will take time to know when human change emotions because it has to read I again the whole face , compare to us the human can see fast when other person get sad. like a quote it say "The Mona Lisa desmonstrate ir really intended to bring a smile to your face, while it shows just how much this computer can do". this mean that the computer is smart it can read faces .
The technology is good for in some reason but reading faces too easy for human and humans doens't need a computer to tell hom the other person is feeling becuase humans can read faces too. their is no reason that human need a computer to tell them when ever a person is sad or happy. Humans can just look at their faces just to see of they are happy or sad. | 2 |
"Mom im going to go outside to get some fresh air" FREEZE! Wait one minute , the air that you breath isnt all that fresh nor clean.
Its polluted.
But check this out people want car usage to end completely , i know you might think limiting car usage is the worst idea you ever heard . Just to stop pollution ? Yes .But if you think about it no cars equal no bad air.
China is one of the MOST polluted cities in the world , cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap air comission.
But oh man, oh man France blame diesel fuel to be the problem . 67 precent of diesel fuel is used in france cars. So maybe that statement is correct.
Another reason why less car usages could be a good thing , it prevent being stuck in traffic & reduce alot of car accidents. Businessman Carlos Arturo Plaaza stated that "Its a good opportunuity to take away stress & lower air pollution" which i highly agree with. Cars are very stressful, they're always breaking down or something ends up going wrong & you spend tons and tons of money just fixing the problem.
"When i had a car i was always tense . Im much happier this way" said Heidrun Walter a media trainer & a mother of two . She walks verdant streets & love listening to her surrounding.
But oh my god in Paris if you get caught driving you will suffer a 22 to 31 dollar fine, Leave the car at home please. Since this no car usage thing started colombians hiked , biked , skated or took buses to work & school. There goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. The sidewalks have been replaced in Bogota by broad so it could be smooth and easier to ride on.
President Obama goals are to get greenhouse gas. It would lower emission and improve safty! So i think it would sorta be a good idea if we would go through with no car usage . It would be a much healthier and cleaner environment. | 1 |
I belive that using the Facial Action Coding System can value to students in many ways. in the classroom. It seems that it can beused to look at the muscles of the human face. they can be used to represent emotions such as fear,sadness hapyness,disgust and even anger. to me it all make sense becuase back then schools didnt use many laptopsao back then it wouldve been useless.
In the article it explianshow using this in school it can show if people are stressed and bored as well as tired. it can be used to base ur lessons depnding on ur mood as it is being scanned students can use this to help study or get help on things in school that they dont understand. it could as well improve on grades wwhen testing comes around.
this famous new kind of technology has been used on a old painting the mona lisa. she is a famous painting that has a grand total of 83%happyfe 9%disguted. and 2% angry in lifethis technology csn be useful yo us | 1 |
The effects of greenhouse gas emission began to take their toll on the earth's atmosphere simply by its own natural output. As time has gone on though, and humans and their ways of transportation have evolved, greenhouse gas emission is becoming more of a problem. Automobiles, mainly cars, play a huge role in the production of nasty fumes and gases that become trapped in the atmosphere. For example, in Europe passenger cars make up twelve percent of total greenhouse gas emission, and in heavily congested areas such as the United States-it can skyrocket up to fifty percent!
Some nations/countries are beginning to take a new approach to battle the "War of Greenhouse Gases". As studies have shown that national driving levels and the amount of people purchasing cars and earning their licenses are dropping after their peak in 2005, people are more and more willing to put down the car keys and put on their running shoes. One of these places in particular is the city of Vauban and is located in Germany. It is a middle-class to upper class community and its citizens can be considered pioneers of suburbia. Vauban does not permit driving in it's limits, besides the main thoroughfare, and a few side streets. Car owners buy a space for their car for $40,000 alongside a home.
While some might argue about the practicality of not driving your car if you have one, it's shown to be extremely beneficial not only for the environment, but for people as well. When you go outside, whether you're headed somewhere or just on a casual stroll, you may reach Nirvana as you enjoy the true sounds of nature. In places where cars are permitted to drive, you might hear the sound of birds chirping outside your window, or the calm rustle of leaves rustling in the wind, but the rumbles, roars, and honks of a car are not far behind. In areas such as Vauban, the beautiful sounds of the world won't be drowned out by a greasy hunk of steel.
Besides feeling at peace, a life without a car is a healthier life! Now, when you want to go somewhere, you must rely on your own two feet. Those two feet, bicycle, skateboard, etc. will be all you need to get where you're going! Unlike many places though, everything is within walking distance for convenience and to encourage you to take these steps. Notice the physical and emotional changes in yourself once in a place with no cars-you'll feel more relaxed, less rushed, and your body will thank you. | 3 |
The author strongly believes that our Earth "twin" planet, should have more attention than what it has. As in more research over it and more resources to gain from it. The author also suggests that more attention should be forward to Venus "If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface?". The author later on spoke about NASA having thoughts of sending humans to Venus because of the benefit that they'll gain from it including the advances from the machines that they have been working on.
Not just that the author also belivies that Venus should aso have care for,
it's a planet that is close to similiar as Earth.
It's temperature average is over 800 degrees fahrenheight and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than our experience in Earth. Other than the author knowing research for their argument, the author persuasion tolwards traveling and studying Venus also describes the perspective of it "Human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation". The author is trying to prove that besides the risks and dangers the studying of Vneus she be reconsidered. | 1 |
Do you guys belive in aliens? Well,I got a friend over at NASA who does. And I'm here to tell you all about the Face on Mars. You know,the one that's been all over books and magazines for like the past 25 years. A lot of people think it was created by aliens,but I don't. Let me tell you why.
My first piece of evidence to put an end to this ludacrisy is that in April of 1998,Mars Global Surveyor flew over the an area of the Mars where the Face was spotted,Cydonia. Michael Malin and his orbit camera team took a picture of the face that was ten times sharper than the original photo from 1976. The picture,to everyones suprise but mine,revealed that there was no alien monument. The picture only showed a natural landform. However the phot was taken during a cloudy time of the year on Mars.
So,on April 8,2001 another photo was taken. This time a cloudless summer day in Cydonia. Mars Global Surveyor used a camera that had each pixel span 1.56 meters. So even if the picture had a plane on it or small shacks,you could still see it. When the photo was taken it shows the Martian that resembles American lamdforms called buttes and messas. It even reminded a scientist of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho.
So I hope this can put away any ridiculous ideas about the Face being created by "aliens". This is all proof that what was thought to have been something mythical,was actually just a landform on Mars! Aliens do not exist. It's just that simple. | 2 |
After I became a seagoing cowboy I was grateful to be helping may people that are injured and hurt. I am grateful for all the opportunities and being there for people's needs. I think many young boys should join because people would count on you to be there. Also they would respect you and honor you because of your great leadership.
I started out at a young age and I was so happy traveling with my friends and helping people out. I think that being a seagoing cowboy is much more than just helping people that are hurt. I look on the bright side. I think of it as an adventure. Helping people out is a great adventure, but the bigger one the real one is traveling over the pacific and the Atlantic Ocean several times.
If you do join the seagoing Cowboys you should put a lot of effort in your job. People will be counting on you for you to save their lives. Also if you where ever doubting yourself never do that you are pushing yourself away from your actual dream. If you don't stop doubting yourself you won't go any where in life. You should be a leader and fight for what's right.
I joined because I liked helping people and saving their life. I hope you will do the same thing and carry this on and convince your friends to do it with you. It is good when your friends are not with you , but it is even better when they are. You should go convince boys or girls to join the seagoing Cowboys. | 2 |
From riding horses with wagons to, drivng cars. this has been a big impact on everyones life. some people drive their cars to get place to place. Others either ride a bike or even they walk to get to where they need to be. In other words some people use cars and some people dont have the money to or just dont want to. So the qeustion remains does not having cars have a affect on our lifes?
Perhaps people think that everyone in the world needs a car that is not true. For example:In the artical Heidrun Walter said that"When i had a car i was always so tense. Im much happier this way." He said this because he even moved to Vauban where 70% of the families do not own cars and 57% sold their cars to move there. my next example will be by David Goldberg he says: "all of our development since ww2 has been centered on the car, and that will have to change. And i think he is right most people in the world are focuse on what knd of car to get and how much they cost. Well maybe we as the people should spen a little less time on cars and a little more on how to better the economy.
Next, In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency is promoting "car reduced" communities, and legislators are starting to act, if cautiously. Because if this happening it will end up that the world will have less accidents on the roads and highways so that means that we will have less people dying becaues of the accidents. For my next example: Vauban homes are 5500 residents within a rectangular square mile, may be the most advanced experiment in low-car suburban life. But its basic precepts are being adopted around the world in attempts to make suburbs more compact and more accessible to public transportation, with less space for paking. In this new approch, stores are placed a walk away, on main street, rather than in malls along some distant highway.
The other way to look at it is that hw are people going to get to work? How are they going to get to the store? Well how are people going to do all these thinds if the dont have a car. If all the car in the world was banned that woould be a bad idea because people would have to star knowing all of the bus,train and subway scheduals so that they would be able to get to work on time. But if they had a car they would not have to do all of that they would just get in to their car and go. Another reason what if you miss your ride to work and your already late then you would have to make a choice to either what for another bus or walk to work either way you are going to end up be late to work. this plan only works if everything that you want and need are very close to where you live and most of the time everything that we want and need are not even close to where we live and way to far to walk.
People all over the world depend a lot on cars but we shouldnt. A lot of time i think that people in america are just being lazy. If you think about it if we take all the cars away then we wouldnt have to pay for gas,insurance, or for that matter buy a car. If we do this everything would be much closer together and it would be in walkin distance and you would be able to save a lot of money. | 3 |
People all over the world have long lived for the day that technology could read your mind. Maybe you wanted to know how your spouse felt about your gift or what your co-workers reallly thought about the home made pizza your brought in. Now that this technology is availible, there are just some things you shouldnt have to use it on. The classroom being one of them, here is why.
The main job for teacher is to teach the students something new, something that they can use later in life. Teachers are also supposed to be able to know when the content they are teaching is helping the students. This technology is going to do nothing but distract or make it harder for the students to learn. This next quote talks about having computers that can tell the emotion of the student. " A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,"(Huang) Computers are already a big distraction to the students in the world, but now we're talking about putting a software in the computer that watches the students everymove and facial expression. This just seems like another distraction for a child lose focus with.
Another reason these softwares don't need to be on these computer is because it is an invasion of the students privacy. Children don't want even more eyes on them because then its going to make them nervous and feel like they can't get anything done because there is someone behind the screen seeing if they mess up or do good. "Using video imagery, the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movements" (D'Alto) Tracking a students work good will help to see if they are improving or not, but tracking there face just doesnt seem ethical.
A computer that recongizes your face just doesn't seem needed for the classroom. We have teachers that can tell whether the lesson is helping the student or whether it's not helping them learn. Teachers all around the world don't need a software that can see how the student is feeling about there class work. We shouldn't have to replace our teachers eyes with a computer software that can tell if the students are having a hard time or not. | 3 |
Driverless cars should not be coming.
Some people may think that this is a cool and fun idea, but it is not safe for the driver or pedestrians.
There are many flaws to driverless cars that should be addressed and taken seriously.
This situation could be very dangerous.
The driverless cars cannot even fully function by itself.
Having the car be driverless someone could fall asleep from being bored or they are expecting the car to do all the work and not need their help.
If the car ended up needing human assistance, because they are not totally driverless, the person would be asleep and not take over, which could cause a wreck.
They could hit a pedestrian and get arrested or get charges pressed against them.
Even worse the person wouldn't have even been aware of what was happening beacuse they were asleep and that could have gotten them injured as well.
Another flaw to these cars is that it can cause people to become very lazy.
Everyone would get used to not having to drive themselves around so they would start expecting to not have to do even more things.
They would become very dependent of other people and things around them.
It would teach children to not learn to do things for themselves and become independent.
They would expect everything to be done for them by their parents, siblings, teachers etc.
In the passage it said they would have taxis as the driverless cars and then no one would have to have cars anymore.
If they make taxis the driverless cars and they do not need any drivers that would result in job loss for all of the taxi drivers.
Not everyone has a college degree and can get a big job so being a taxi driver is all they can do.
If that is taken away from them they are left with no job and no way to pay bills or provide for their families.
This would cause their families to go into debt and suffer just because there was now driverless cars.
Driverless cars are not something that the world should have.
They can make people lazy, are dangerous, and could cause job loss.
Just because it seems like a cool idea, does not mean it is a good idea.
Other people around the world have to be taken into consideration and all of the consequences of the cars have to be looked at and taken very seriously. | 2 |
A studying of a Venus is a worthy persuit despite danger because the authors explain many things about Venus and how Venus is also one of the brightest points in the night sky. The authors provide that Venus is actually a planet and Venus is
the scond planet from our sun in solar system. The author supports the ideas very well by explaining how they works and how challenging.
This is a challenging exploring because the author provide the texts from the article is that "Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth, it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely.'' This is shown that it is challenging for us human to explorings. Some of the reasons it is challenging because for a good reason there was no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours and why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades. Venus has the hottest surface tempperature of any planet in our solar system. I believe that Venus is a challenging planet for us humans to study and not easy conditions but we are still trying.
This is not going to be easy for us to studying that but we are still trying to exploring about our Venus. Venus is like our planet because the planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes fimiliar features such as valleys, moutains, and craters. Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and they could supported various from of life. I believe that we can be try to studying about Venus and try to learn about it because in the articles is saids that "Many researchers are working on innvations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus." This show that we have a chances to study about our Venus.
This exploring challenge can worthy because NASA is working on the other approaches to studying Venus. They are trying to create machines that can be resistant and the ideas that they trying to recreate is from the old technology called mechanical computers. The mechanical computer is a devices that can make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require electronics at all. The ideas of NASA is to create part of machines that can resistant of pressure, heat , and other forces. I believe this is going to be succed for us to study venus even though it is going to be cahllenging for us. If the recreation is succed we can exploring and learn about the Venus and our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers. | 2 |
Today in society we have alot of disagreements on which president should be elected on the day all votes are finally counted and the votes are tallied up to the final result of who is going to be our new president of the United States, but what is our system for doing this?
One way is
Electoral College,
Electoral college is a process consisted of thye selection of the electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for President and Vice President, and the counting of the votes from congress. So if you think about it we are just electors for electors. This College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 votes can win the election for the President.
Under the Electoral college, voters dont vote for the president, they vote for state electors who in turn elect the president. There are many veiw points of the Electoral College, but most would decied that its unfair, outdated, and irrational. The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions whithout much basis in reality. People want to have their vocies hear for the country they live in, they want an opinion that matters! You can't have that when someone else is speaking for you... | 0 |
I am against the development of driverless cars. I don't think they should develope thesess cars becasue, They still need a driver, they cause an issue with the law and they are inconvient.
The driverless cars this passage is referring to still require the drivers full attation and gidence. The passages states, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skill, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents." From this statementwe see that the car needs a human to do difficult task that teh drivers are trying to advoid.
The smart cars are new to the world so there are not to many laws about them creating an unsafe enviorment. The artical states, " As a result, in many states it is illegal even to test-coputer driven cars." There are four states including the Distric of Columbia that allow smart cars. The text also states, " If the technology fails and smeone gets hurt who is at faul-t teh driver ot the manufacturer?" This brings up a new problem. There will be endless amounts of cases having to do with recks. Today with human driven cars the driver is to blame for an accident that leads to the injury of smeone eles. There is no confussions on the matter.
The text states, "Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting there turn to drive?" If the driver is just having to wait for something to happen so they take over they will loose concertration. People to loose track of what tehy are doing while driving making it to where they dont have to is not such a good idea. The text also states, "The car can handele driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but specile touch sensors make sure teh driver keeps hold of teh wheel. If the driver must keep hold of the wheel the whole time it would be like they are driving the car themselves, giving no reason for the car to be ran by a computer.
I dont think they should contiune with the development of the smart cars. They still need a driver, they cause issues with the law, and they are inconvient. | 2 |
There is an advantage in limiting car usage. There are three articles that will show you the advantage in limiting car usage.
In article, In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars by Elisabeth Rosenthal, it says, "VAUBAN, Germany-Residents of this upscale community are suburban pioneers, going where few soccer moms or commuting executives have ever gone before: they have given up their cars." In this article you can tell that in Germany people have explored many places and they explored without the use of cars. Then, how do they get from one place to another? In the article it talks about Heidrun Walter, a media trianer and mother of two, walking through verant streets where the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drown out the occasional distant motor. Heidrun Walter says, "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." As you can see, when people drive it causes them to be tense. May be because they are afraid they will crash. While on the other hand, when they are walking they feel happy because they don't worry about someone hitting them, plus when they walk they enjoy the beauty of nature.
In article, Paris bans driving due to smog by Robert Duffer, talks about banning the use of cars because cars are polluting the environment. It says, "After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." As you can imagine many people didn't like the idea. The reactions of the people caused a big change. In the article it says, "The smog cleared enough Monday for the ruling French party to rescind the ban for odd-numbered on Tuesday." So the advantage Paris is doing is trying to make sure the environment doesn't get more polluted. Paris is trying to keep the environment clean.
Other article that gives an advantage in limiting the use of cars is, Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota by Andrew Selsky says, "BOGOTA, Colombia-In a program that's set to spread to other countries, millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during a car-free day yesterday, leaving the streets of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams." As you can see, people in colombia are doing many things that does not involve the use of a car. They have a car-free day. The rection of the people having a car-free day is way different from the reaction of the people in Paris banning the use of cars. Bogota Mayor Antanas Mockus says, "The rain hasn't stopped people from participating." Bussinessman Carlos Arturo Plaza says, "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." Enrique Riera, the mayor of Asuncion, Paragauy says, "These people are generating a revolotionary change, and this is crossing borders." As you can tell from this article people are very happy in having a car-free day and they are making a huge difference in the environment.
These three articles show many advantages in limiting the use of cars. One they reduce the pollution cars are making when driving. Two it takes stress away from people. In the three articles it talks about people being stress or tense when driving. Having a day without a car relaxes them. Other advantage is that they enjoy walking around and seeing the beauty of nature. Which nature is another way to relax and not be stressed or tense. Would you take a day without a driving a car? Would you like to have a car-free day? | 2 |
What's the Electoral College? Many people don't understand or don't know what its used for either. Its mostly used to decide who the president is going to be, but also for the popularity. The Electoral College is a helpful but harmful method, due to not updating the regulations of it. We should keep the Electoral College because thats what we've used since the beginning of our nation. Many people dont relise it but it does help us a lot when we have to decide who we want for president. My few reasons on why we should keep the Electoral College are, what happens with your vote, why we use the Electoral College.
Firstly, when you cast your vote it goes directly to an office to be counted and store for later. The Electors who cast the Real vote for the state look over the balets and decide who to vote for their state. Billions of people cast their votes but really only 270 count and those are the representatives for the states. You many think your vote doesn't count but in reality it does to the Electors of your state. We need to keep the Electoral College for our voters and to keep our tradition.
Secondly, we use the Electoral College to guid our electors on who the people want to lead our country and to help lead our country. Many people don't vote cause the lines are too long or they claim they don't have time but we really know that they don't care. Everyone should care cause we need everyone to vote and help the state electors choose who we want for president or who we want for other helpful positions.
Inconclusion, we need everyone to vote and we want them to know what happens to their vote. So Mr. Senator please dont take away the Electorak College. | 2 |
In this essay I will be describing why it's important to study and pursuit Venus despite the dangers that are involved. Scientists know that sending human life to Venus is just out of the question right now and it shouldn't be done, but they are working on ways around that. Scientists have sent spacecrafts to Venus unmanned, but they only lasted for only a few hours.
Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long ago, Venus was probably covered with oceans and could've possibily supported various forms of life. Today, Venus is still like Earth in some ways, there are valleys, craters, and mountains. There is no way Venus could support life now because of the conditions of the planet. 97 percent of the planet is carbon dioxide and the average temperature of Venus is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit.
Scientists are trying to figure out and solve different ways they could find information on Venus. NASA has come up with one pretty reasonable idea for sending humans to study the planet. They came up with the idea of having a blimp-like vehicle that would float 30 miles above the planet's surface. The temperatures at this height would still be hot, at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. The conditions wouldn't be easy, but humans would be able to survive.
Being 30 miles above Venus's surface would be hard to get information on the ground conditions, so NASA is coming up with new ideas. One idea they have is to use mechanical computers which haven't been used since the 1800s. These devices make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require electronics at all. Using the computers we have nowadays would react terribly if we exposed them to the heat of Venus. If NASA were to use the mechanical parts, they would be more resistant to pressure, heat, and ther forces.
With time and a lot of hardwork, I think one day we could discover what Venus is really like. It would be a good idea to keep pursuing Venus because you never know, we could have life on that planet someday. We all know that this mission is dangerous, but we can't let that hold us back. | 3 |
My argument about Lukes point of view is that in paragraph four it show that Luke had made nine trips, so Luke tavels to a lot of different places. Luke had traveled to the eastern coast to get to China. Luke would want others to participate in Seagoing Cowboys program to teach what Luke does when he is a seagoing cowboy.
The article shows that Luke adventures lot sof things when he is a seagoing cowboy he ahd to take care of animals when he was a seagoing cowboy, such as a horse and a cow. Luke and his friend Don signed up to probably or most likely show that Luke was a good seagoing cowboy. Luke had crossed the Atlantic Ocean 16 times that had affected by World War two.
Details from the article that supports Lukes claims is Luke always helped other animals that had was showed in the passage. I think others would join Lukes program because he is a grateful person that shows that Luke is grateful in the passage. Luke had showed that Luke was a grateful person is, in the passage it says ''Caring for animals during the crossings kept Luke busy''.
I think that Luke loves being a seagoing cowboy because in the passage it shows that Luke loves being a seagoing cowboy. Luke showed that he wanted to help others and animals as he would want to start a program. Luke had toured an excavated castle in crete and maeveled at the Panama Canal on his way to China. I think he liked China as the best tour that he probably been on before, because he talked a lot about China in the passage about where different parts in China that he had been to that had been stated in the passage. The conclusion is that Luke is a good seagoing cowboy that was showed in the passage. And he loves that he is doing in the passage i think, he likes caring for other animals that were in the passage that it was stated in the passage. | 1 |
Dear Senator,
It is the peoples right to vote on who represents our country, but why vote if you cannot choose the the direct candidate you want? I demand the electoral college to be abolished, it is a violation of the peoples right to vote for who they want. It is enough nonsesne of voting for someone to vote for you. Popular vote is the fairest way to vote, in lines 24 though 31 of the text, it exclaims that state committee's and candidates pick the electors. So candidates choose the electors that the people vote for? How do we know the candidates or committee's aren't sabataushing their power and picking the people they opinionly want, as opposed to whomever? We don't!
With the electoral college exsisting we are giving our power to other poeple that can vote for us. We are handing them free votes, so they can vote for who'm they'd like. That is not fair! They say that the most powerful person in the world is the people, but with the electoral college it has partially been robbed. In lines 26 through 27 of the text that supports the electoral college it states that "it is the electors who elect the president, not the people." That sentence proves to you that the people are incontrol of voting for their president.
Yes people may say that without the electoral college favoritism may appear in certain states and places. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that! There may be more voters for one candidate in a certain place, but as long as the people voted for whom they want there is no injustice.
In lines 17 through 18 of the text that supports the electoral college it states " that trust is rarely betrayed." RARELY? Meaning wrongful doing has happened between the lines of the electoral college, and are likely to happen again...Do not be blind to the electoral college's purpose. It is damaging the voting for our presidential election. Popular voting, where all equals and powers vote for the president they want.
Sincerely,
PROPER_NAME | 2 |
The author supports the idea of studing Venus is a worthy persuit dispite the dangers because it has some similarites to earth.
The similarites to eart are that Venus has valleys,mountains, and craters. They want to study venus to see if it is safe enough for a spacecraft to land and get more evidance . NASA has a possible solution to the hostile conditions on th esurface of Venus would allow scientsts to float above fray.
Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not be exceed earths levels. Not easy conditions but survivable for humans.
To find out more important information about Venus the reseachers would have to have some type of sample but they cannot
take samples of rock, gas, or anything else from a distance. To conduct a thorough mission to understand Venus would have to get up close and personal dispite the risk. We are not yet able to land and get pieces of the planet because of some risky differences from earth that we would not beable to compet with.
NASA is working on other approches to study Venus, lookig back to an old technology called mechanical computers played an inportant role bakc in the 1940s during worl war 2 these devices make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require electronics at all. Systems that use mechanical parts cna be made more resistant to pressure,heat, and other forces.
Dispite the dangers of Venus because its diffrences from earth , our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by these dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation. We need to find ways to protect our self on Venus and be able to stay alive if we were to ever land there. | 1 |
Dear State Senator,
The Electoral College is widely awknowledged for serves a purpose as a method of selecting a president and vice president, not a legitimate college. The Electoral College was established by the founding fathers in the Constitution as a compromise between having the President elected by a vote in Congress and an election by a popular vote of qualified citizens. This process of choosing a president needs to be modified into popular vote for the reasons that the Electoral College was established to actually vote a slate of electors, voters feel disenfranchised, and is unfair to voters.
To begin with, the Electoral College was actually established for voters to vote for a series of electors, which then get together to have the final decision. Stated in "What is the Electoral College?" by the Office of the Federal Register, " The founding fathers established it in the Constitution as a compromise...process consists 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." This means that under this system, voters don't vote for the president, but for electors who then elect the president. The voters sometimes aren't told full front that they are chosing someone else and not always can they control who their electors are voting, leaving many puzzled. Voters aren't to be puzzled. They are to vote who they'd like because it allows them a freedom to express who they want because they are strongly awknowledged of the troubles of their society and how they should be handled.
In addition, the Electoral College makes voters feel discouraged and disenfranchised. According to "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President" by Richard A. Posner, it is stated, " No region...has enough electoral votes to lect a president...residents of the other regions are likely to feel...that their votes do not count...that he really isn't their president." This means that voters feel that the presidnet they chose is their president because they believe their votes count.
Futhermore, the Electoral College is unfair and irrational to voters because the candidates they "vote" for don't spend time with them. Sizes matter to the candidates. According to "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong" by Bradford Plumer, it is stated, "...the electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-takes-all system in each state, candidates do't spend time in states they know have no chance of winning..." This quote conveys that because some states are small in population and size, they will not help the candidate succeed. This is immensely discouraging to the voters because they feel worthless for not being big in size. Candidates should not have an excuse to not thank all their voters because every vote counts, not matter how small.
Admittedly, the Electoral College allows a clear and certain outcome because it exceeds the popular vote, however, the method is actually turning off potential voters for a candidate. The popular vote allows every voter to express their opinions because the overall vote chooses the puopular president.
In the final analysis, a change is needed because with the Electoral College many candidates are losing potential voters considering that the qualified feel that they arn't doing much by voting considering they aren't voting for the president, but a gamut of electors to vote for them. They alos express the feeling of discontent and unfairness because they feel that they don't count and know they have no chance at winning. | 4 |
Can you imagine what would the future be like if there wasn't anymore gasoline for our cars or other thing that we use it for? We can't use gasoline forever with the cars we have today. There are many different ways that we could drive cars without using gasoline. The sun isn't there for no reason. I'm going to tell why i think i see cars in the future, but made different.
Earth does not have a life time supply of gasoline. We can desgin cars in different ways to make them drive. I think cars should be desgin to take over sometimes, but only at times when you need them. There are probably car crashes every day because someone has fallin asleep on the road, or texting, or drunk. Texting and drinking & driving have became a big thing these days for people these days.
Instead of using gas we could use energy for the sun to drive to car. such as solar power. but just imagine how much those cars would cost. Would they cost way more thsn the cars as of today? Would it have to have less people in the car because what if it takes a sertin amount of people bepending on how much people are in the car. Like i said before the sun isn't there for no reason. Many things as of today live off the energy of the sun's energy.
I believe there are so many ways we could drive cars in the future. I've seen videos where the car was suppose to stop on its on sincer in it. The main two things that i think we could use to keep cars running is solar power in water. The Earth is covered with 75% of water and pretty soon the ice up North is going to start melting and land is going to start over flowing with water in the future.
This is why i think we will still have cars in the future. | 1 |
Driveless cars seem to be the next big invention people want to see. It seems like a great idea in general, but it would take a long time to get these cars approved and in a state where it would become the norm to own or use one. The money and time taken to develop these cars would be of better use elsewhere, these cars would cause unnecessary issues, and they also would endorse human laziness.
I do not think these cars should come to existence because of the time and money that they would take to develop. Even if they do use less fuel, the money that it takes to manufacture them is so great that I am sure their selling price would also be rather high, making it hard for common people to afford one. Only richer individuals would be able to afford these with ease. It just does not feel practical.
The passage also mentions issues that could arise between manufacturer and consumer. Where would the blame fall in the event that this new technology fails? Different laws and regulations would have to be created in order for these cars to be safe on the roads. Maybe the car will not know how to react to pedestrians and accidentally hits one and injures them. It would be hard to draw a line of who is to blame in those kinds of situations.
Lastly, I just do not like the idea. Because it endorses human laziness. Humans are already becoming more sedentary and technology is always being developed that makes human life "easier", but the tech just makes it worse. All of these devices make it so a lot of people do not eve. Have to leave their homes or do much of anything. People become obese and develop health issues, shortening the life span of humans and also putting babies at higher risks for health issues. The driverless car would be another one of these technologies that contributes to this laziness.
In conclusion, I do not believe that driverless cars should be technology that we should use in the future. Something like developing the most energy efficient car possible would be of better use. Driverless cars waste unnecessary money in development, would cause unnecessary issues, and endorse the already lazy behaviors of human beings. | 2 |
Nowadays, technology is becoming very advanced. It seems to become more advanced every day, and now we are at the point where computers can detect emtoions through facial expressions. FACS (Facial Action Coding System) is a system that can recognize human emotion based on how much all 44 major muscles in your face move. This technology has many uses. When you smile at a certain Web ad, a similar ad might follow, and when you frown at a certain ad, the next ad might be different. Also, this technology can make video faces more expressive for video games or video surgery. One very important use of this technology is in our school system. Using this technology in our school systems would be very beneficial because it could help students better understand lessons.
Education is becoming more technology based. Many lessons are being placed on the internet for students to read, students are typing essays and completing online assignments and then sending them to their teacher by email, and students even take the ISTEP on the computer instead of by hand. This facial coding technology can help students in an age where it is easy to get lost in the vast amount of resources that are on the Web. Paragraph 6 of the article states that if a student becomes bored or confused during a lesson, then the computer will notice that the lesson is not beneficial to the student, and it will change the lesson like an effective human instructor. This would be very helpful because it would make sure that the student is enjoying and most importantly understanding the lesson. The student would see an increase in test scores and grades, and would be more likely to remember the concepts of the lesson because the lesson was enjoyable. Students will get a lot more out of their education if this technology is implemented into the classroom.
Overall, this new facial coding technology has many benefits. One of the most important benefits is in our education system. If computers could recognize a student's facial expression, it could help the student fully understand the lesson which would lead to an increase in test scores. With the world of technology constantly advancing, students need something that can help them with their education. Instead of browsing through web pages and desperately searching for anything that could help them understand a lesson, computers could alter the lessons and make it easier to understand. This new technology is very beneficial to students, and is vital if education continues to be more technology-based. | 3 |
Driverless cars had always been only a fantasy.
However, recent developments in transportation make this fantasy a possibility.
Still, people question whether the development of said "drierless cars" would be beneficial or detrimental to society.
In the article, "Driverless Cars are Coming," the author's report on the growing developments on driverless cars shows a more positive than negative trend for the future of automobiles.
Examples from the the article attest to this observation.
The creation of a driverless car represents a stepping stone for the evolution of transportation to motorists, futurists, and manufacturers alike.
In the third and fourth paragraphs, the author gives readers the history on the development of autonomous cars from customized tracks to "Google's modified Toyota Prius."
This brief history of the innovation of the automobile shows readers the already impressive progress that researchers had accomplished so far.
By comparing present driverless cars such as "Google's modified Toyota Prius" to the very first autonomous prototype tracks such as General Motor's special test track, the author enables readers to appreciate how far humanity has gone and how close humanity was to being able to construct autonomous cars.
Later in the article, the author informs the reader of BMW's "Traffic Jam Assistant."
Although the traffic jam assistant can "steer, accelerate, and brake themselves," "this means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires."
The BMW Traffic Jam Assistant shows the extent to which automobiles can drive autonomously.
Although the car still requires the full attention of a driver, the BMW Traffic Jam Assistant serves as proof of researchers' accomplishments over the development of "driverless cars.
As seen in the various accomplishments that might be able to make driverless cars a reality, the construction of a truly autonomous car would be remembered as a landmark of human achievement, a final stage in the evolution of the autonomous car.
Although autonomous cars appeal to the public eye, the introduction of driverless cars bring about some concerns from the law.
As "Most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers, and pedestrians safe," it will be imperative that the possible construction of these autonomous vehicles be flawless.
People to this day still doubt the reliability of the driverless car as seen how "it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars" in some states.
However, the current automobile technology was centered around the safety of the passenters as seen when the author quotes, "in this way, the in-car system is actually a safety feature."
When explaining the purpose of the google car, the author states, "The Google car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over."
The fairly autonomous Google car was developed for the sake of making roads of the future safe.
Based of the trend in the developments of the autonomous car, the cars of the future will not only be more technologically advanced, but the cars will bring about a safer environment for both drivers and pedestrians.
The reliability of the autonomous car should not be of concern to skeptics as the cars will continue to evolve to suit the needs of the driver as "safety is a big concern" to developers.
"While the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver."
In the article, "Driverless cars are Coming," the author's reports on the hopeful introduction of the "driverless car" presents a positive trend in the future of travel as the fiinal development of the first autonomous vehicle would be both a memorable and benefical achievement.
Autonomous cares have been made for the sole purpose of tending to the operator's safety and as research progresses, the safety of drivers across the continent shall improve as well. | 3 |
My postion on driverless cars are simple reasons why i dont trust them .I wouldnt feel safe walking down the treeet know ing that a driverless car is driving 25-30 miles next to me and them mess up and hit me. There are so many reasons why we shouldnt and here just a few .
I feel that driverless cars have some faults because for some big reasons succh as if we get into and accident who would know what happened would it be ther car or the driver and it would take a long time to figure out .
Another reason would be that if they had driverless cars we wuld have to have a special liscense and so many people would have to retake the driiver test and so much more. Its crazy because the fact is this that people would have so much of a harder time of driving the driverless cars because you never know when the car will mess up and you have to take over theres so much little detail that we havent worked out yet .
I feel that if we were to have driverless cars that people wouldnt know how to act that some people would be stupid with them and we already have a problem with texting and driving, i feel like his would bring the same concept to people .If we can be hand free with out driving it would be crazy people would be doing the craziest stuff if they were hand free.
Then there the way in part of the article it said "even if traffic laws change we would need new laws to in the case of an accident " so why do we need smart cars when in all reality we just need people to pay atttention to the road .Fot my conclusion i feel that were fine with cars that have a driver and that i feel its more safer than driverless cars . | 2 |
Cars have been around for years and years.
They have become more advanced than ever before.
Thinking about driverless cars seems so futuristic and unreal, but that's not always a bad thing.
There are so many things that contribute to driverless cars whether it be effective or harmful.
These new cars have many pros to them but also many cons that put me right in the middle of the arguement.
First of all, I never thought that I would be alive in the time that invents the driverless cars.
That is one positive thing that contributes to my thought of developing these cars.
Just think of how futuristic this is! Science and technology has advanced tremendously in the past few years and will continue to forever.
We know from the article, that the driverless cars would use half the amount of fuel than regular cars, which is so helpful to our world today.
Also, they have gone more than half a million miles on their own without a single crash.
That seems pretty effective to me.
They way that technology is succeding in these last few years shows how safe scientists are trying to make our planet.
On the other hand, not everything about driverless cars are perfect.
Though this article told us that the cars can go more than half a million miles without a crash, what happens in extreme conditions?
A car by itself does not have a sense of right and wrong.
As humans, we know what things are right and what things are wrong when driving.
I do not doubt that the driverless car have something built inside of it that creates that sense, but nothing can compare to a real life reaction.
Also, the car would not have a natural reflex like humans.
The way that humans react to certain situations is natural and fast.
The driverless car would not have that ability.
Who's fault would it be in a crash? I have a feeling that this arguement would create alot more contreversy than needed.
The driverless car or the driver? Most people would blame the car and the buisness because why take the blame when you could easily turn it to something else? This horrile thinking would not create a more peaceful world.
Another point is that humans will become way to dependant.
Our world is getting very lazy and this wouldn't help.
Being too dependant on these driverless cars will make everyone not want to ever do anything for themselves anymore.
In conclusion, the driverless cars can be a very big advantage in our worlds technology and enginerring but is it too much?
It is great to see the scientists make new inventions and try to save money, fuel, and time.
But what I am most concerned about is laziness.
I want to see our world beocme more independant and active.
Instead, we are becoming too dependant on the world doing things for us and not having any motivation.
Seeing driverless cars out on the road would scare me a little bit.
Not seeing htem would make me feel more independant. | 2 |
I think the rock that landed in mars was meybe because it had came from a diffrent place or maybe because the rock was to old or to heavy. The rock may have move to Mars or landed in Mars maybe because something hit it and it just went to a diffrent place and it landed in Mars.
The rock maybe have laded and make or had a face shape from the way it landed. Im not so sure if it had landed like that to make a face shape. That's what I am thinking, is that it was like that from the way it had moved or it had changed. Some pople are surprised that they haved found a human face in the or in a planet. I know its kinda wierd but u never know what could happen.
They say it had a human face. They say it had eyes and it had a nose and it had a mouth in the face. They should be scared because what if it was aliens that did that and that made the face. I would be scared but maybe it wasent the aliens maybe it was just regular. It just could've been Something regular or sothing natural that just happen. | 0 |
Is using a computer that reads people emotion called Facial Action Coding should be used of students in class. I Think IT should to show if the student is going trough some hard times and may need some help.
Onereason is that students dont know how to handle things thy can get caught up in soem things that can effect them long term. Some student may come to school and get bullyed and they might not know how to handle something like that and wind up getting hurt because they wont speak up. In stead of talking to a teacher about it they get in to fights and no one will want to hire them and they wind up on the streets with no jod.
Another reason is that people may have trouble with money at home and it would help to talk to them about that because they might try to steal and get arrested for it and wind up in jail when they could have better things to do. there dad might be a drunk and beat him when he is drunk so using this machine we could see the proublems they have and help them with it.
One last reason is people need to get out and see the world and find new things. you never know they might like what they see and want to find a job like this one reading people emotione.
In concultion it is good to have some thing to read people emothins so we know whats going on in there life. You never know it might save someones life. | 1 |
Self Driving cars, we've seen them in movies and on television. Not science fiction anymore. Google has been trying to develop a fully self-driving car, that consumers can buy and use. Not most people are against these potential dangerous vehicles, because of the driver's lack of control and the fear of something failing in the car. In fact, some people are so afraid of letting these things on the street, that some states for example, California, Nevada, Florida, and even the District of Columbia, have put down laws to prevent these potentially dangerous tools on the streets. I am all for these new advancements in traveling technology, because they will help to reduce crashes, braking would be much more easier to detect, and they will for sure keep their drivier's eyes locked on the road.
Now will many car crashes happening every year, people might assume that a slf driving car, not aware of the things surrounding it, would be more likely to cause a crash then regular cars...right? Wrong! Google, the company trying to develop these machines, have found out ways of preventing even more crashes in these vehicles. First, they actaully took a Toyata Prius, and attached a camera, sensors, and even a GPS reciever to the car. The GPS would help guide the thing, the sensors would help with braking and knowing if something is near by or coming towards the person inside, and the camera would as well, help the driver out when on the road. The camera also revovles constantly on the roof and creates a 3D model of the car's surroundings to help out the driver. Don't believe it would work? What if I told you they actually tested it, and the car made it mkore then half a million miles with a crash! Yeah!
Now of course some drivers are either on their phone or doing something else to even pay attention to the road and what's ahead. Yeah, you know who you are. Now of course Google has figured out a solution to those problems as well. Some of these things I've already mentioned, so I won't go into too much detail. For one the self driving car would have the LIDAR sensor camera to help make you aware of the surroundings. Now there will be a camera inside to make sure the person is focused on the road, and if thy aren't will send a "wake-up" call to the driver to make them do what they need to do. Now one downside is the self driving cars they said would also have entertainment, that is another thing to distract the driver, but they fugured out that problem as well. They made it to where when the driver needs to focus on the road, the tech you're on would immediately switch itself off, to let the driver know that something is gonna happen, unlike phones that don't do that, again increasing the probability of crashing.
Now the driver's eyes are most important while driving. A driver must be fully aware of it's surroundings, or else something could happen to them, or somebody else. Google realized this as well, and added a few new features. Again, a few of these things I might have already talked about, so I won't go into too much detail. A camera would be inside the vehicle to allow a person to watch the driver, to make sure their doing what they're supposed to be doing, and even though it's a self-driving car, the camera will also make sure that the person's hands are on the steering wheel as well. Now again, I don't like that they decided to put in entertainment for the driver, distracting them and increasing the chances of a crash, but again they took care of that by making them immediately switch off whenever the car believes that it's in danger.
Now then, are self driving cars okay to use? Right now I think they're decent enough to use, but not ready for consumer use. I mean even though they did keep in mind the negatives and the positives to these cars, they still need a little more work, in my opinion. But I do believe they will be ready to use, and will be safe because of the new features they added, but get rid of that entertainment part of the car! | 4 |
I do not think that diverless cars should be a thing. It allows drivers to not pay attention. They could cause more acciddents. The driver might not feel or see when the car is trying to get them to pay attention because it needs human feautures. I believe that driverless cars should not happen.
If somebody had a driverless car they would probably not be paying attention at all. They could be on their phone the whole time or who knows maybe even taking a nap. If the car needs them for their human features and their not paying attention then most likely they won't be able to assist the car with their human features.
Diverless cars could cause more accidents. The car could have a malfunction and go crazy. If they need the human features and the human isn't paying attention then that cauld cause an accident. I think driverless cars are a really bad idea. The risks of them causing more accidents are very high; and the risk of the human not paying attention is very high also.
In my opinion I think driverless cars are not good for the safety of other humans. I think that driverless cars will be more harmful to all of us. Diverless cars have so many hazards that everybody needs to be aware of. Maybe if they work out some of the kinks, like it needing human features; then maybe it wouldn't be so bad. As of now though I think that they are a really bad idea. | 2 |
Can you picture a life without human in control of driving? Yes, it might sound like a good idea but its more realistic then you think. In the article Driverless Cars Are Coming it states " Telsa has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of dring on autopilot 90 percent of the time. Mercedes- Benz, Audi and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by 2020". Humans have always been driving cars since say cars have been invented. The idea of drivless car is new since humans have always been in control manually. Driverless cars is a idea that is inot logical. There no point in making driverless cars for people to use.
When it comes to a car there are so many parts that could go wrong. Imagine what could go on with a car that is driverless. A driverless car would have more technology parts then a normal car does. If a part goes damage you don't know what the damage could be. This idea is new and so many people will not be able to fix a part on their driverless car. Technology is still a very new idea and their people who don't know how to use it.
Who really need a driverless
car in life. This idea will just increase the laziness people will have. People would depend on this car and forget how to drive a car. Life today is just fiding new ideas to make humans life easier. This car will increase the laziness in humans and make their life harder then they think. In the article is say" Why would would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver? Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?". This idea takes out the fun in driving a car and makes it extremely boring.
This would affect finacially people. Not everyone would be able to afford a car that is driverless. Some people can barely afford a 2002 car let alone a new driverless car. What would happen to those who can't own one of these cars? Will their normal car cause a problem to these new driverless cars.
In conclusion, there is no need for driverless cars to be invented.There are so many factors to think about before jumping into the idea. Technology failure, increase in laziness, and the money need for a car like this. Would you really wanna see yourself siting in a car you cannot control? | 3 |
A computer shouldn't be able to tell peoples emotions. Having emotions is a very personal thing between you and only you or if you choose to share them with others. Thats what makes people so real and relatable to. A computer shouldn't be able to determine somes emtions or be creditiable enough to do that because its not a human a lot of malfuctions can happen. Your taking the realness out of the human and puting it into a computer.
Them wanting to use computers to show peoples emotions might make people feel very vulnrable. "Even though individuals often show varying degrees of expression" (like not smiling as broadly).
Which is saying that they are calculating our different facial expressions. Also they shouldn't use math to calculate people feelings what if they calculate wrong? How do they know our emotions can even be calculated with numbers? We aren't calculators that you can just punch in numbers to figure us out.
That will be very hard no one should feel like there feelings are being told off to everyone. Its no ones business espicially a computers job to be telling your emotions that what makes you a human being. Not everyone wants to be like da Vinci painting Mona Lisa. Some people just want to be themselves. Without having to put their feelings on display. That should be there choice not some computer, doctors, or scientist choice. | 2 |
The Face on Mars has been a controversial subject for about 25 years now. Some people think it was created by aliens, while others think it's a natural landform, as proven.
To start off, why would scientist lie about a possible life form on a different planet? If they had any evidence or clue there was life form, it would blow up fast. With information becoming so popular more people would take interest in the subject, resulting in more funds. If anything, scientist would want to find new life form.
Also, there has been a lot of photographic proof of it being a natural landform. There has been different pictures form a handfull of different times, wouldn't you think there would be some kind of evidence at all if it was really made by aliens?
Not only is it more logical to assume it was a natural landform, there is no evidence against it, but evidence to support it. | 1 |
I don't think that a computer can identify human emotion how about you? In this article it talks about a facial action coding system which allows computers to identify human emotions.
But my opinon is I don't think that will work because. I feel like in order to know something about soemone or know how they are feeling you must know the. A computer device can not know you in a way that a human can. Computers may know about you from another source but it will never have that human to human chemistry and connnection. It will never workout.
The author also states that faces dont lie so even if it did work thhat doesn't mean that its correct because it is so easy to fake a smile orfake emotions. But the machine also can identify major muscuular actions and can tell the diffrence between a geniune smile and a fake one just by reading the muscles. I belive that they are trying to say the computer can calculate humans like we do math which is by far not true at all because we are humans and we fake stuff we lie and we do many other things that a computer cannot read. | 1 |
Hi I am Luke Bomberger I would like to tell you about a Seagoing Cowboys program that I went to when I was young I joined in 1945 when war world II was over in Europe and here are some reasons you should come join too.
A reason to go is that you save peoples lives and give them things that they really need.Another reason is that you get to expolar the entire world parts of the world you have never seen in your life by boat . Also you get to become a hero to them by helping your own family and other peoples family . Another gerat reason is you might find your own family that needs a lot of help and you help them that were fighting for you and there family to stay alive . Also you might find young ones that were in your shoes at one time and needs a job to help there family and you help them sign up and you become a hero to them. And the most important reason is that you are helping out the entire world and you will be the best hero you wanted to your family the whole world one day you would like to say I helped that person's life. So why don't you sign up for the Seagoing Cowboys program. | 1 |
While driveless cars can fundamentally change the world, they would be far too much of a risk in reality.
While computer-driven cars are fascinating, self-driving cars are not functionally the same as human-driven cars. Self-driving cars cannot possibly maneuveur throughout the highway, or swerve at the sigh of a small animal from afar. While there are automatic sensors along with laser beams, the touch of a human would be far less risky to not only the driver, but, the manufacturer as well.
Additionally, drivers would become bored waiting to drive, as addressed in paragraph 8. Besides that, if humans do not need to drive cars, but still supervise them from the inside, then it is far more risky for injuries since they most likely will not be paying their upmost attention. This would be due to the fact that drivers would become bored, they would turn on music, play on their phones. Therefore, owning a self-driven car is also another safety precaution.
Another issue with self-driving automobiles is the law. For example, most driving laws intend to keep the drivers, passengers, and pedestrians in a safe haven. However, with self-driven cars, new laws would still need to cover the instances in a case of accidents. If the technology were to fail mid-road, or in the middle of nowhere, what would the driver do? Given the driver to be coincidentally alone, on the road, and in the dark, a self-driving automobile can be crucially dangerous.
Another issue with self-driving cars is the quality of their sensors. What if they broke in the middle of a long road trip, or even on the highway? This would endanger not only the driver's safety, but the safety of others. With technology always comes the risk of malfunctioning. Humans' lives' on this earth are far too meaningful to throw away because of mindless technological cars.
Lastly, the self-driving car can be dangerous because of the lack of work it allows humans. With this, can come laziness. With laziness, comes minimal attention they will pay to the roads. Again, this would risk passengers and pedestrians outside of the driver's car or in the driver's car. For humans not to be aware of their surroundings, can cause great damage. For instance, knowing that their car is self-driven, they will most likely check their phones, stare into space, or observe all the outside forces that do not involve their car.
In conclusion, self-driven automobiles are a dangerous risk to our society today. In order to survive as a society, we must ensue the safety of not only ourselves, but others. Safety is crucial, so let us not risk it. | 3 |
My thoughts on the " Facial Action Coding Sytems" is that it may work but it also may not work cause we can't always count on technology to tell us if it's right or wrong, or true or false. The " Facial Action Coding System" is supposed to tell the reader how you feel with percentages on happiness, sadness, madness and even fear and depression.
We dont really need this machine cause it can put out false information to see how you really feel. Say you are actually really happy and you arent sad at all but then you go to the machine and it tells you that you are 70% mad, 15% sad 10% fearful, and 5% happy. That is putting out false information on how you really feel because you feel happy.
When you look at someone you can usually tell how someone is feeling by there facial gestures. We don't need the "Facial Action Coding System" to tell us how someone is really feeling and most of the time if you ask how someone is feeling they will tell you they will be straight up with you. They will behappy that someone actually cares enough to know how they feel.
Personally i don't think we need the "Facial Action Coding System" because that is a waste of money and research. Why would we do research on something that we can go up to someone and ask them how they are feeling we dont need percentages or anything to wild we just need a simple answer like "i'm fine how about you?" or " I'm good how about yourself?" or " I'm fantastic, How are you feeling on this wonderful day?"
I think it is a waste of money to do research on something we can do in person when we ask someone how they are feelig today. You just have to ne polite and nice when you ask someone on how they are feeling. Just cause the " Facial Action Coding System" tells you the persentages on how you fell doesnt mean anything because for all we know it can be false and it can produce false information on how you are feeling so to end this off i don't think we need the " Facial Action Coding System". | 2 |
In the article "Driverless Cars Are coming" the author presents both posititve and negative apects of driverless cars. In my opoinion I am against the development of these cars. I think that this cars are not safe, and would be to expensive.
Firstly, the driverless cars in my opinion are not safe. I think this because technology can always go wrong no matter how much time or money is spent on it. You just never know when it can go wrong. For example, in the article it is stated that traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safest car has human driver control at all times. So it is insane that people are trying to develop a driveless car when by the law it is proven to not be safe. Another example is in the article it states that if technology fails and someone is injured who would the fault lie on. So this shows that with driverless cars technology will fail at any time, and can cause accident on innocent people who in the first pplace where never in support of driverless cars.
Secondly, the driverless cars should not be developed because they are to expensive not only for individual people but for the country. For example, in the article it states that the smartroad sytems work surprisingly well, but that they require a massive upgrades to exsisting roads, that was simply to expensive to be practical. Driverless cars would require the upgrade of not only a part of Indianas road but the whole U.S. and the world. Which is a tremendous amount of money that would be needed to upgrade all the roads. Driverless cars do not only need upgrades in road to be safer and work better, but the car itself needs alot of expensive technology to operate correctly and safely. For example, a driverless car needs spinning sensor on the roof, dubbed LIDAR, it uses laser beams to form constant updating 3-D model os the car's surroundings, and so much more is needed for the driverless car to mimic the skills of a human at the wheel.
In conclusion, driverless cars are not and will not be any much safer then a human at the wheel, and the cars are to expensive and would be a waste of money for the country. Driverless cars will fail at some point because tehcnolgy fails, so why risk the life of innocent people. The cars are to expensive, so why waste so much money on driverless car. They are not needed but are only a desire of human imaginaiton, inclsuive a luxury for many. | 3 |
Technology today is crazy. It keeps expanding and getting bigger, better, and faster. Recenltly scientist have made a computer that has the power and technology to read emotions in students and in other people. I feel like this shouldnt be used in a classroom.
I feel that a computer shouldnt be able to tell wether or not a human being is sad or mad, it shouldnt be able to tell our emotions. Our emotions is for us to handle. Yes, us humans can tell when people we know are sad or down, but computers should not. People would use the computer for somthing else, like to see others emotions. Peoples emotions should keep to their self. It isnt for a computer or other humans to now, because its your emotion.
Yes, this could be valuable for some things, like movies, and video games. THis is not something we could use everyday in a classroom. We could use the computer to see whats wrong with a student. Once we figure out whats wrong with the student, for instance lets say the child is sad. The child is so sad, he cant work or do anything, and us humans cant notice it because he is hiding it. We could use the computer to see what emotions he is having. Once we figure that out we could help him, by doing somthing that makes him happy.
This computer couldnt be valuable in a classroom. If a teacher assigned their students to make a project over the expressions of a human.
Then the coputer would take forever to load. Each human expresses their emotions in a different way. One could be hiding it better than the other. Therefor the computer could get the students emotions wrong, and the students could fail. | 2 |
In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author suggest that studing venus is worth while even though their are extreme dangers while doing it. The author supports this idea in the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" by the similarites to earth making the dangers worth while, the testing on diffrent pieces of equitmeant to withstand the extreme climate of venus, and the life they believe was once their making it a plave they want to explore.
The author in the article explains many resons in which he or she thinks the dangers of venus are worth it for science one of them being the similarities which they can see from far distance the planet has to earth. the author says Venus is often referred to as the earths twin due to the size, mountain like, and believed to have many oceans and waterways making venus very simlar to the earth. with venus being the closest planet as well to the earth having a closer distance to venus from earth.
Though Venus is concidered the twin to earth it has many diffrent features making it dangerous for scientist to explore the planet. One of these extreme dangers is the diffrence in climate as said in the article Venus reaches upwards of 800 degrees Fahrenheit easily melting most metals making it hard to recieve samples from the planet. Though they have tested many new products in chambler ith simlar climate to venus finding new ways to hopefully find more out about Venus.
lastly the author also talks about how Venus most likely had life on the planet similar to that of earths scientist are interested in finding out more about this even though many dangers are included in this task. Finding new ways to make sysems in which can be sent to Venus is difficult but found early computers with physical componets might be the key to their succsess in finding out avout Venus past.
In conclution Venus has many similarities to earth, but due to the extreme conditions of Venus it makes it hard for scientist to explore and find out more about the planet, even though it is the closest to the planet earth. These dagers and risk are worthwhile due to the simlarities the earth shares with venus, the new test of equtmeant in which can withstand these climates, and the life in which they believe use to be on Venus all make exporing Venus, even with dangers worth the time. | 2 |
Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. in the fourth paragraph it says venus is the most like our solar system. "long ago, venus was probably coverd largley with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like earth". i believe scientests should go to venus or at least try. if they can get there and study the planet, we will find out new stuff. what if scientists figure out there can be life forms in the planet. that would mean we could have a whole new world. in paragraph 5 it says "The national aeronautics and space administration (NASA) had sent a human to venus". when they sent that person he/she survied. "not easy conditions, but survivable for humans. every day people are studying this planet. i think maybe one day people will be able to live on venus and that venus might be our new planet. this is why i think studying venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. | 1 |
The reason it would be a bad thing is say you dont want nobody to know how your feeling. Some people dont like it when other people know how they feel i hate when other people know how i feel. Another thing is that maby youru feeling a way and you dont want nobody els to know how your feeling cause you might get juged for how you feel.
Thers some good things to this to, cause when an add pop up you dont want it to be a boring one, you want it to be like a cool movie coming out or an new fortnite update and etc. And with the computer being like that it would amke you want to stay and watch it. Another thing is is that when an add comes on it makes people lose there happyness palying the game and so they just get off the game amd gop do something else, cause usally the adds be like 30sec-1min long and dont nobody want to wait that long to go back to there game so they just get off it and go to the nect game they like cause know they got addsw in almot everything and if your playing a game and you die then its an add and people get tired of that and dont want to play anymore.
in the article it says that smiling and frownimg will help the computer relise weather you like the add of not. If not then they willa diffrent on next time and if you smile are look intrerested in the add they will do more like that one and then it would go from there. But again not all people like people knowing how they feel some people keepm there self privet and with that nobody could feel privet anymore. So no i dont think they should put that in computers cause it would mess it up for the people that liked to be keep ther self privet | 1 |
My position on driverless cars is I think they are a good idea because it would make long road trips easier on the driver. I say that because if it notifies the driver when something is wrong or they need to take the wheel I think it would make less accidents happen. It has a sensor for when people need to reverse the car and makes noises or vibrates the seat if the car is to close to something. Also in 2013 when BMW annouced the development of "Traffic Jam Assistant", the car can handle driving functions up to 25 mph. But the driver has to keep hold of the wheel so the driver would be alert at all the time if they need to take control.
If we have all this stuff on the car like the "Traffic Jam Assistant" sensors for when the car is in reverse and it alerts the driver when they need to take over the accident rates would drop. People wouldnt be so careless when they drove too. Some people get tired of driving or they just want to be on their phone well when they have the driverless car all those probelms would disappear. They would just have to be alert when the car needs them to take the wheel. Driving may sound fun to new drivers but new drivers can be reckless and careless it would definantly drop the accident rates.
The only bad think about the driverless car would be if something failed than it would be the maufactures fault. It is their job to make sure to alert the driver to take over and make sure everything works. But automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that problems ahead will be solved. They are expecting a car that can be on autopilot 90% of the time we just have to drive that last 10%. In 2020 three different cars are expected to be able to drive all by themselves. Making the driverless car better than they expected. | 3 |
Dear State Senator,
The Electoral College is unfair for voters all around the United States. The Electoral College is a Winner-take-all system in each state, the candidates don't spend time in the states that they know they have no chance of winning. They only focus on the tight races in the swing states. For example during the campaign in 2000, seventeen states did not see the candidates at all. Voters in the twenteyfive of the largest media markets didn't even get to see a single campaign ad!
Further more, "voters vote for not the president, but a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president." Voters cant always control who their electors vote for. The voters sometimes even get confused about the elector and vote for the wrong candidate. If you lived in Texas and wanted to vote for Bob Smith (just an example), you'd vote for a slate of thirtyfour Democratic electors who are pledged to Bob Smith. If those electors won the statewide election, they would go to Congress and Bob would get 34 electoral votes toward his presidency. The electors can be anyone not holding a public office.
Did you know that over 60% of voters would prefer a direct election more tham the kind of election we have now. According to the article " a Gallup poll in 2000, taken shortly after AI Gpre-thanks to the quirks of the electoral college-won the popular vote but lost the presidency. Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO, in their time, all aggreed on one thing, abolishing the Electoral College. This years voters can and will expect another close election in which the popular vote winner could lose the presidency, once again.
The best argument against the electoral college is called the disaster factor. Americans should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century, but the system allows for worse. " Consider that the state legislature are technically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people." In 1960, segregationists in the louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratic electors with brand new elecors who would go against John F. Kennedy. Some faithless electors have even refused to vote for their party's candidate and instead they vote for whoever they want.
So its official now, the Electoral College is outdated, unfair, and irrational. The name makes no sense also why is it called the Electoral "College"? The Electoral College should just be abolished like Bob Dole said. So who is actually voting for the president? We the people? Or the Electoral College? | 3 |
While today's generation has made numerous advancements in
technology, driverless cars have experienced the largest contraveral arguments. While some believe that driverless cars could benefit our society in numerous ways, other beleive that driverless cars are dangerous and could potentially do more harm than good. I personally belive that we as a society should continue the development of driverless cars and offer them to the common people.
In the article it states that Google has had driverless cars for the past seven years although they only driver under certain conditions. The advancement of driverless cars have increased so quickly in the past seven years that if given another, we could perfect driverless cars and make our rodes more safe. If we had driverless cars, the percentage of car crashes due to drunk driving or texting in driving would decrease to almost zero percent. That alone could save countless lives and save money.
Also, it isn't as if these cars have no safety reprocautions. These driverless cars are equipped with sensors that "can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine, allowing far better response," as stated in the article. These cars are smarter than some of the most intelligent human beings. They can predict an accident and safe ways to avoid it while humans can only respond naturally, which could be hazrdous for all drivers involve.
In addition, these cars aren't completly driverless. "The car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mpg, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel." These cars keep the driver alert and allow the driver to take over the task if the driver feels as if the car is not in a place where it can drive itself.
In conclusion, I am completly for the development of driverless cars. They could prevent hazardous driving, have afety reprocussions, and can still require an alert driver. Thes cars can be a huge benefit to our soceity and could save countless lives. So why not give it a try? | 2 |
While
writing the "Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author knew almost everything he or she needed to know. The auhtor knew the risk and danagers, the benifits, and even the history. With the author knowing the facts I think he or she didn't do a good job of realy supporting his idea, that exploring venus is valuable due to the fact that, he has more negatives than positives that cancle out the beinfits of the exploration.
"Researchers cannot take samples of rock,gas, or anything else." If researchers can't take back sample or any physical testing iteams from Venus, It'd be a huge waist of time. Not only a waist of time but also more importantly money. That's important because if you can see the planet that should be just enough, instead of spending millions of dollars on a dangerous space mission for you not to be able to take test samples and to risk lives flying astronounts through a "highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere."
Not only does Venus have a high acidic atomsphere but it also has a really high level of pressure that
would "crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans." This statement alone completely debonk's the authors entire idea that exploring Venus is a great idea. The idea of exploring Venus after reading that argument shouldn't even be close to being considered due to the fact that we wouldn't be able to get a ship in the air space of Venus. But if we were to even get a space craft
pass Venus's highly acidic atmosphere without melting, then the spacecraft would more then likely slowly be crushed.
Last but not least, actually landing a space craft of any sort, with it lasting for a long enough time is virtually impossible. Due to Venus's "surface tempurature average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit," It'd liquify many many melts. Not only is the ground tempurature scortching hot but Venus is full of "erupting valcanos,powerful earthquakes and frequent lighting strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface."
In conclusion, that author did not do a very good job at supporting their idea. The main reason the author failed to do a good job is because he or she had more facs to go against their argument, and aso their arguement was almost just an imagination of a way to explore venus by hoveirng 20 to 30 miles off the surface. | 2 |
In "A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves" Luke joined the program because his friend Don Reist asked him if he wanted to come with.
He knew it would be a once in a lifetime opprotunity, and because he would go to different countries.
In paragraph two it said,"World War II was over in Europe, and many countries were left in ruins."
To help these countries recover 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA to give them food supplies, animals , and more.
The "Seagoing Cowboys" were hired to take care of the animals onboard the ship as they were shipped overseas.
They also had to clean the animals stalls and give them food and water.
Luke liked doing it so much that he did it many more times.
He crossed the Atlantic Ocean 16 times and the Pacific Ocean twice to help people affected by World War II.
When they were coming back they played games in th eempty stalls to pass the time.
In conclusion,
I believe that you should join the "Seagoing Cowboys" to help the people can be affected by any wars or other things. | 1 |
I would keep it the same because it would put more work on the poll workers because they would have to count all the votes for each president. If they miss a few votes the wrong person could be elected as president. I would rather them keep it the same because its simple, faster to calculate, and easy to read.
I say its simple because you just have to count the votes and make an elctoral vote and then if u have the most electoral votes for that state it mean that you won the vote in that state. At the end it matters who has majority of the electoral votewhich is 270. It'sbasically the same as how much states you've won to see who will be elected as president.
I also think its faster to calculate because when you do electoral votes you would see how many electoral votes yu have out of 538. The majority of electoral votes is 270 so, If you have majority of the 538 votes you will be elected.
It's easier to read electoral votes because you are adding and subtracting only 538 people, but if you are counting from popular votes you would have to add up millions and billions of votes that would be miscounted. If it's miscounted the wrong person could be elected for president. | 0 |
The author does not do a good job supporting this idea. The author has did not put what would benifit humans if we where going to travel to Venus. There are about 3 paragraphs that are full of bad things that could happen to a person on Venus. The other paragraphs do not fully explain why it would be worthy of trying to study Venus.
The author put a lot of bad things in his/her text about going to Venus. In paragraph 3 is states "On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 time greater than what we experience on out own planet. The state also states in paragraph 6 that "peering at Venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere, rendering standard forms of photogra[hy and videography ineffective.
The author does put some good things about studying Venus. In paragraph 4 it states "Venus was probably coverd largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." From this state meant studying Venus could help us found out more about its past. The text also states in paragraph 6 that "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of the Venus would allow scientist to float above the fray." This is one of the few ways that a human could explore Venus.
The author had stated some good thing but yet with every good thing that he/she had stated there was always a bad. The author also did not do a good job of stating why humans need to study Venus. The author states in paragraph 8 that it is good for human curiosity. That to me is not a good enough reason to send a person to this planet with all the risk that they will have. | 2 |
I, think for one of my that we should keep, the old methods are founding fathers have created. The Electoral college has work for hundreds of years. Sure it has some flukes in the system but many can be buffered. Some problems can be fix, but we deffinitaly don't need to switch it up. for the Electoral College each party is eqaul in the race for president. Each candidate running for president in our state has his or her own group of electors. The electors are chosen from by the candidates political party, the states vary on how they are to be selected. You help choose your stat's elector when you vote for president, really because you vote for your candidate you really are actually voting for your candidate selected electors. After these few steps in the Electorical College once all the voting is settled a Certifcate of Ascertainment also declares the winning predsidential candidate in your state at a meeting in December of election year. The certificate is sent to the Congress and the National Archives as part of offical records to the presidential election, then you wait.
Now, some people disagree with me on not keeping the old method. Some people thing now is a good time to start a new way, or tradition. many people of the US also thing that there are many flukes in the Electorial College. quoted " At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters ". I strongly disagree with that quote because the voter no matter what is voting for there side. Weather they are voting for democrate, or republican the vote goes to an elector and then brought to state, which goes in as a vote for presidence. another quote released " It's offical: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational". Now how is that qouted true when for years the Electorial College has worked everytime.
Finally, the reasons on why we should keep the same method. The reasons on why we should keep these methods in general. These reasons are Certainty of Outcome, Swinging States, Big States, and the Avoidence of Run-Off elections. All these reasons are valid reasons on why we should keep the sam method. Certainty of outcome we always have and outcome and rarly a problem. We have swinging states which gives each candidate a equal fight. Also big states in which can cause can great break through for a candidate if they win the state over. These are all valid reasons on for why we should keep the electorial college going. | 2 |
Did you know Venus and Mars are the closest planets to the Earth? Did you also know that it is the brightest star in the solar system during the night time? Did you also know planets are stars? Venus is a hard plant to visit for human because no human knows what it feels like to be on Venus. "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" is a story that tells us why humans keep studying the planet Venus. Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit because it is the most earth likely planet, they are coming up with new approaches , and astronomers and humans are fascinated with Venus .
First of all, studying Venus is a worthy pursuit because it is the most earth likely planet. In the article it states, "Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those of Earth." In the text it says, that humans have sent many spacecraft to Venus. So, since they have sent many spacecrafts to Venus they would know some of the things that on the planet.
In addition, to it being the most earth likely planet studying Venus is a worthy pursuit because they are coming up with different apporaches to make it have less dangers. In the article it states, " NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float about the fray." NASA is not giving up on different ways to make it the Venus, they are also trying to make it safe so people can actually go and see since the spacecraft are not lasting as long. The article also states, "some simplified eletronics of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions." But NASA has been testing new technology so their spacecrafts could at least last more time then the orinigal. New computer technology is more equipt than the orinigal.
Finally, studying Venus is a worthy pursuit because astronomers and humans are fascinated with Venus. In the article it states, "Venus would go get up close and personal despite the risks. Or maybe we should think of them as challenges."
The article also states, people are thinking as if the risk are not dangers but are thinking of them as challenges because they are so curious to know what on the planet. When people want to know something they are going to keep trying and trying until they reach their goal no matter what it takes.
In conculsion, Venus is one of the many planets that has not been fully explored but soon that goal is it be reached. Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit because it is the most earth likely plaent, they are coming up with new apporaches, and the people are fasinated with Venus. Although, it might take some time the people are going to achive what they have been striving for. | 3 |
Throughout Americas history, people have always owned cars. They use them to travel into the city or long distances. But now it looks as if the tides may be turning for automobiles. Studies have shown that car ownership and average miles driven by citizens have decreased dramatically in the past ten years. Not only is the the case for the United States, but all around the world.
Cars every year release emissions that are harmful to the enviroment. The emissions pollute crowded cities, which makes it dangerous for citizens to live there. In Paris, days of near-record pollutuion made the city partially ban driving for two days. Even number license plates wouldn't drive on one chosen day and odd numbered the next. If the citzens did not comply to this, they were fined twenty two euros. Four thousand drivers had to pay that fine for not leaving their vehicles at home. The other citizens that did comply with the city helped dramtically reduce the smog in Paris. And during the partial driving ban, congestion was down nearly sixty percent.
The decrease in automobile use is not only being used to decrease pollution, people also say that not driving a vehicle helps reduce stress. Heidrun Walter of Vauban, Germany said, "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way". She lives in Germany's experimental suburb that is "car free". Automobiles are not banned in this area, per say. But if you want to own a vehicle in this neighborhood, you must buy a parking spot for 40,000 dollars and a home. This neighboorhood is helping shape the way for a future wihtout cars.
One of the main benefits that would directly improve the qaulity of life for humans by decreasing car usage would be exercise. Obesity in the world, especially in America, has been an evergrowing problem in the past twenty years. People have become so busy in their lives where exercise is not one of their top priorities. Without the use of automobiles, citizens would have to either walk, bike, skate, or jog to their destination. This way they would exercise while traveling, wherever that may be.
Overall, the world is preparing for an inspirational future without cars. This would help the world in many areas like Paris or Hong Kong for decreasing pollution or help America with the battle against obesity. No one can predict the future, whether it contains automobiles or not. But the world is certainly becoming less dependant on them, who knows, one day they may become obsolete. | 2 |
Is better keep the Electoral College or change to election by popular vote for the president of the Unite States ?Is better keep the electoral college because if you keep it they can vote for their president and also when they vote for their president at the same time they are voting for their candidate's electors.
One reason why you have to keep the electoral college is beacuse they can vote for their president, the presidental election is realized every four years after the first monday of November. When the presidental election is done the governor of each state has to prepare a Certificate of Arcertainment how the Federal Register says. Not only keep the electoral college allow to vote just for their president , they also when they are voting for their president they are voting for their electoral.
Moreover why you have to keep the electoral college is because when they vote for their president they are trusting on their electoral because if they vote for their president they are actually giving a vote to their electors. The governor has to prepare the Certificate of Ascertainment.
What the Certificate of Ascertainment do is that it declares the winning presindential of the state and it doesn't just declares who is the winning presidential it additionaly shows you will electors are going to represent your state atr the meeting of the electors in December of the election Year. Finally your state's Certificates of Ascertainment they are sent to the Congress of your country and the National archives it as part of the official records of the presidential election. Not everybody thinks that keep the electoral college is better.
It is true that if you change it by popular vote for the president many people is going to like it beacuse they just trust in the suposely best president , but if you keep the electoral college alot of people prefer vote for their president and at the same time they know they are voting for their electorals so they think is better beacuse maybe their electorals are pretty good like their presindent.
To conclude is better if you keep the electoral college because you are going to give us the opportunity to vote for our president and at the same time we belive in their electorals. | 1 |
Dear Senator,
What is the first thing that comes to your mind when you think of the Presidential elections? Do you think about the complicated eloctoral college or the popular vote? As an average citizen who is not in politics i immediately think of the popular vote when it comes to the Presidential elections. Why do we have the electoral college anways? Shouldn't the people be able to decide who the president is not the state legislature.
SO therefore instead of the electoral college we should just stick to the popular vote.
As an American you have certain unalienable rights, and the act of voting is one of them. So if its our right to vote than we should be able to do it not other people. The electoral college isnt that safe either. In 1960 as stated in the text, when President Kennedy ran for office segregationist in the state of Louisiana nearly succeeded in replacing the democratic voters (elected by the people) with voters who would have voted against Kennedy. Or in 2000 when Al Gore won the popular vote but George W. Busch won the electoral vote and caused the biggest election scandal of the century. These are just a few examples of instances where the majority has won but the electoral college has caused an issue in the election. I am unsure of your preferences over popular or electoral but who the majority of the American people decide should become the President. We shouldnt allow some 538 politicians out of some 3 million citizens to choose the President. The American people should choose all of us not 538.
Though our founding fathers decided that we needed a system to decide the President instead of letting the people decide times have changed. Scandals have taken place, and issues have risen. But yet we still use this process even though we have an election all it does it we elect a select few to represent us. Why cant we just pick right away? The Constitution of the United States of America is based off of a democracy where the people run the government through our elected officials. Nowhere does it say that we elect people to elect the president. That doesnt sound like the country electing the president; it sounds like a few "qualified people" electing the president.
So Senator I ask you that you make a motion to eliminate the electoral college. All it does is take away our rights as citizens to elect our officials. It has caused many scandals as well. So please I hope you can agree that we need to eliminate the electoral college and only use the popular vote. | 3 |
In this essay you will see reasons for the people who think it was created by aliens, and the people who think that it was not created by aliens. You will also see textual evidence for those reasons that we have. In this article we will be talking about " The Face on Mars". So here our the reasons for us to think it was created by aliens and for it not to be created by aliens.
I believe that the face n mars was not created by aliens. I believe that because of how the "face" has evolved. In 1976 the face looked like a face. In 1998 it started to not look like a face at all. In 2001 it just looked like a rock. So i believe that it was not created by aliens but that it was just something the olanet had made itself. This has certainly got the attention of the people.
The "Face on Mars" is not a face. If you look at the pictures from 1976, and 1998, and 2001 and in the text it says that the photo from 2001 is the most recent photo that NASA has. It still looks nothing like a face so since the 2001 picture is the most recent it shows that it is just a natural landform. It is just a natural landform. On Mars there are natural landforms everywhere and the fade away. Here on earth natural landforms are created everyday.
This article it also states that the "Face on Mars" is really just a mesa. Which proves that the so called "face" is not a face and it is just a landform.
Others still thought it was a face. Those people thought that because of what the article says in parargraph 11. In paragraph 11 it states that " As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size, so if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground, Egyptian-style pyramids, or even small shacks, you could see what they were!" So because of what they had said in that paragraph people believed that they had saw a face.
Those are the reasons for why people had thought that the "Face on Mars" was an actual face. Also the reasons why people thought that it was just a natural landform instead. | 2 |
There are planets that we all are curious about, but with curiousity comes danger. Challenging ourselves with exploring with Venus is a risk but it's a risk that we might take. Astronomers are intreged that Venus once have been a Earth-like place before and includes familiar features like earth. Also Exploring Venus may be exciting but also dangerous because of it thick atmosphere of 97% of carbon dioxide and it temperture average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit. With that being said, it's worthy of studying despite the dangers it presents.
Astronomers are intreged that Venus once have been a Earth-like place before.
Years ago, "Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." As it sates in Paragrapgh 4,sentence 3. Venus might be like mars because Venus might be worthy of living but we won't know for sure if scienists don't study the planet.
Another reason why studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it persents because it includes familiar feature like earth. If Venus once had familiar features,then it was probably suitable for forms of life. In the article, paragragh 4,sentence 4 states "Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Eath" Also in paragapgh 4 sentence 5 states "The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and included familiar feaatures such as valleys, mountains and craters."
It may be worth studying but it comes with dangers such as Venus has a thick atmosphere of almost 97% of carbon dioxide. A human being could handle so little of carbon dioxide because its toxic to bodies. Also,it's clouds has sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. In the article, in paragrapgh 3 sentence 1 states "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide." Also in paragraph 3,sentence 2 sates "Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid Venus's atmosphere."
Another reason why it be might be dangerous, if the scientists decide to study the planet is because of the temperture of being 800 degrees Fahrenheit. Even though if a human being can't step a foot on Venus, it can send a special meachine that can withstand that temperture. In the article it states in paragraph 3, setence 3 "On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 | 2 |
The reason for Luck Bomberher to join
the UNRRA program so he can help people,take care of the animals and to see different states like China and Europe.The letters UNRRA stand for United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration.Some of the animals he help was a horse,young cows and mules that were shipped overseas.
In the mounth August 1945,they had got a order to report to New Orleans,when they arrived August,14 luke said,the day the Pacific war ended.They got on the ship called the SS Charles W.wooster headed for Greece with 335 horses plus enough hay and oats to feed them.One of the most crazy thing is that he had turned 18 on the ship and before he got there.He wanted to be in the military but they told him to stay in the program UNRRA.BY the time he had been discharged in 1947 he made nine trips more than any Seagoing Cowboy.
The cattle boat trips were unbelievable opportunity for the small town boy luke.He said besides helping people he saw China and Europe.But seeing Acropolis in Greece was special,he said. He said so taking a gondola ride in Venice,Italy,a city with sreeets of water.Luke also toured an exacavated castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal on his way to China.Luke had to care for them animals and that keep him busy because it took them a month to get to China.He had to feed them and watered them three or two times a day.The dangeres part was night watch he was
coming down the ladder and slipped but a small metal along the edge stopped him from slidding. He said that he cant do that for a couple of days.Luke said that trip opened the world to him.Im grateful for the opportunity,he said. | 2 |
There are many advantages to limiting car usage and many people are starting to see it. In the article "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars" By Elisabeth Rosenthal; She goes to explain that in Vauban, Germany there is a community that have given up on cars. Without a car on the streets you can tell its more lively with the quote "Heidrun walter, a media trainer and mother of two, as she walked berdants streets where the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drown out the occasional distant motor." With that quote from the article you can tell that the streets are filled with the sound of people rather than the sound of motors and smoke from the vehicles.
Certaninly not having cars is a great advantage to suburbs, in Rosenthal article it said " there have been efforts in the past two decades to make cities denser, and better for walking... in attempt to make suburbs more compact and more accessible to public transportation... in this new approach, stores are placed a walk away..." Instead of wasting gas and filling the air with disgusting gas, stores could be just around the corner. Which in return would be easier for everyone around. Even the united states, enviromental protection agency is promoting"car reduced" communites.
Another advantage to limiting car usage is to reduce smog and air pollution, in the article "Paris bans driving due to smog" by Robery duffer he informs us that paris actually enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the golbal city. It stated " Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog... [the smog] rivaled Bejing,china, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world." By banning driving they not only were able to reduce the smog and air pollution, They obviously reduced car traffic!
Also In the article "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in bogota" by Andrew Selsky, they banned car in an effort to promote alternative transportation and reduce spog. In the article is said "parks and sports center also have bloomed throughout the city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad , smooth sidewalks; rush-house restrictins have dramatically cut traffic; and new restaurants andupscale shopping districts have cropped up." The day also is said to help lower stress, " It's a good oppurtunity to take away stress and lower air population,"said buisnessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife.
As you can tell from the facts within this essay, there are definitly many advantages with limiting car usage, from reducing smog and pollution, to having stores built closer to home. These advantages not only help the citzens but also the planet we live on, and our future children and their children and so on... | 3 |
Technology is developing new stuff everyday. Things that are usually an everyday thing are becoming less and less, like the driverless cars, some people despise driving and some people love it. Can you imagine cars that you don't even have to drive? You just tell it where to go and it takes you there on command.
I think that's crazy, driverless cars starting out are going to be very dangerous and the road to explore and find new ideas to make them safer is going to be a long one. Some of the cars Google has built have been able to "drive independently under specific condiotions since 2009." Google also says that many of their cars have driven miles and miles without a crash, but that's with a driver who's ready for anything to happen and ready to act at any given time.
When the driverless cars actually become driverless, I think it'll be a disaster because some people are going to get carried away with it and just not think that their car will never have a malfunction. More people are going to wreck and people are just being plain lazy nowadays. It really doesn't take that much energy to drive a car. Of course you have to stay awake and make sure you're paying attention to the road at all costs, but people are just getting things handed to them.
With driverless cars people probably won't have to do drivers ed and their drive times with instructors who are making them better drivers. I think it's just nonsense.
On the other hand, there could be a couple positives to this. Some people are born with conditions that can make them not able to drive or do stuff most people do, but with the new driverless cars they'll be able to enjoy the satisfaction of just being able to sit in that drivers seat just like any other person out there. That is if they find a way to make the completely driverless, because if not then they say,"this means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires.
One of the most common tragedys that occur are people dying from drunk drivers. Some people make stupid decisions when they're drunk and they might decide to drive home because they think they're well enough too and of course if you're with a bunch of other drunk people they're probably going to encourage it because they don't no any better.
With the driverless cars, people making that poor decision won't or might not be affected by it. That's if the scientists find ways to make the cars safer to where you don't have to drive it at all. | 3 |
Driverless cars are an amazing thing. Technology has improved quite a lot due to the fact that we can know make these. Even though they seem cool there are actually many downsides to driverless cars. Driverless cars should not be used on the roads. Driverless cars may seem cool to everyone now but nowing the downsides will change people's minds.
One of the first issues with driverless cars is the issue with driving in traffic. When one is in difficult traffic the car can not drive itself. It would need to human to take full control. If the point of driverless cars is to not have to pay attention and let the car do all of the work then the cars should be fully equipped to drive itself in traffic.
The biggest issue with these driverless cars is the legal issues. If one gets into a crash because the technology of the car freaks out then whose fault is it? If someone else in another car is injured who takes the blame: the human or the company who made the car? Many laws would have to be changed in order to put these cars out on the roads. Liability laws are set in place for humans driving cars because that is the way the world works; humans drive cars, cars do not drive humans.
Lastly how "self-driving" are drivereless cars. There are not any cars out right now that are one hundered percent driverless. The driverless cars right now can accelerate, steer, and brake but, they notify the human in the car when there are sites up ahead that involve human interaction. This would be things such as work zones, accidents, etc... Due to these issues the human driver would always have to be on alert. These cars are not equipped to handle the roads yet.
All in all, these cars may seem like a cool idea but they have many downsides. This world is not ready to put out driverless cars on the roads until we know they can fully drive themselves without any human interaction and liability laws are changed. The risks with these cars are not one that the world is ready to take. | 2 |
" I cant believe that the face was made by real life aliens its unbelievable! " Jim said
" Dont tell me you believe that the fae was made by aliens. " i said
" Actually yes i do. I believe aliens are truly real and don't care what anyone says. " Jim said
" Jim there is no such thing as aliens maybe they may be real, but we have no sign or evidence that aliens are truly real. You watch to many Sci-Fi movies jim you need to lay them off for a while. " I said
" Well if you think aliens don't exist then tell me prove to me how the the face was made then. " Jim said
" Ok i will let me just go and get the picture. "
I said
In my head i am thinking jim is nuts there is no way an alien had made the face.
" I'm telling you jim aliens did not create this. " I said
" If aliens didn't creat this explain to me why or how this was probably formed from the picture. " Jim said
I look at jim right in the eye and was glad to show him with confidence that i was right and he was wrong.
" Look jim in 1998 when Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera team flew over cyndonia for the first time Michael and his team to ten pictures sharper than then the ones that the viking's photos took. When we all saw the photos it revealed a natural landform and no alien monument. " I said
" I still don"t believe you. " Jim said
" So you want to me to explain more? " I said
" Go right ahead. " Jim said
" Garvin said that it reminded him of the Middle Butte in the Snakes River Plain of Idaho. Thats a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars. " I said
" Well i guess you have a point there, but that doesn't change the fact that i believe in aliens. " Jim said
" Ok you can believe in whatever you want, but i was just simply telling you what we told to other people that also believed it was made by aliens. " i said | 1 |
Throughout the years, the human race has evolved, and developed new forms of technology. We've managed to create and discover many great things, such as discovering fire, electricty, finding the cure for terrible diseases, and we must admit that all these things have changed our lives completely, whether it's in a bad, or in a good way.
We have now recently created a software, that allows computers to recognize our emotions, all by reading our facial expressions. They are now debating if they should include the software in school computers, this way the software would know whether the student is enjoying, struggling or getting confused by the lesson, which is exactly what they would need to know in order to modify the lesson. I personally believe that it would be a great idea to allow schools to have acces to this software, it would be a great help, since for many students, verbal communication is just not their thing. "Most human communictaion is nonverbal, including emotional commmunication," notes Dr. Huang, sometimes it isn't easy to open up to people, especially teachers. Most students fear that teachers are going to yell at them or judge them instead of helping them out, and unfotunately this type of situations still happen in our school. Everyone deserves a chance to be heard or understood, even those who dont have the ability, or simply don't feel comfortable communicating verbally with others, this shouldn't even be up for debate. | 1 |
Driverless cars should not be created as they are unpredictble and are not very relilable. The article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" explains the basic functions of driverless cars and the safety and dangers of driving one.
The article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" states that the driverless cars that exists today are not completely driverless. They are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills. The sensors on a driverless car are unable to maneuver through work zones and around accidents. The driver basically waits around for their turn to drive. The point
of a driverless car is so that the driver does not have to necessarily pay attention. The driverless cars that exist today require the driver to remain alert and be ready to take control of the car. The driverless car becomes useless if it still requires a driver. The driver would need to pay as much attention in the driverless car as they did in a regular human automated automobile. In most states its illegal to even test computer-driven cars. Traffic laws focus on keeping drivers and pedestrians safe. If we were to have driverless cars, traffic
laws would mostly likely have to change to accomidate.
Google's modified Toyota Prius uses plenty of sensors needed for the driverless car to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel. Sebastian Thrun, the founder of the Google Car project believes withat with the technology that we have today, we are finally able to make improvements to the driverless car that in the the past would have cost millions. Driverless cars can steer, accelerate and brake themselves, but only in certain road conditions. While the driverless car appeals to a majority of the population due to its futuristic feel, they are not entirely reliable. The driverless car must be human operated when navigating through work zones and around accidents. The car is also unpredictable. With most technology these days, malfunctions can occur spontaneously. If the brake on the driverless car were to stop working, then the driver and the passengers who are not paying attention could get seriously injured.
Driverless cars, while an innovative idea, are not necessarily the best idea. Driverless cars still require the driver to be alert. The technology that drives the car could break down at any moment and cause harm to the occuptants. Technology can be helpful, but it is best to not completely depend on it. | 3 |
I think that everyone shoulkd be a part of Seagoing Cowboys because, not only if you join this program you will see and go to places you have ever been before .There is more to this program than just going to a place and seeing it just to see, but to go and learn and help the people that are having problems with the things they may or not need. The adventure that we go on are eye opening. Helping around the places we go are very fun but can also dangerous . Even though your on a boat or ship you can find fun in spare time.
There are also benefits of going places around the world like Europe and China. Other places that benefits you is Greece you can see the Acropolis, and more. The most speacial thing of all is the bond that you make with the people in the the places that you go to. Some people in the program bond with each other because there are 44 nations. As in addtion to my statement there are a lot of people and things that the peole need ,an if those people could change places with use they would do the same.
The UNRRA has helped the Seagoing Cowboys programe ship and improve. So I think that every one sould want to be a part of the Seagoing Cowboys. | 1 |
Computers don't have emotions, but you do! Imagine technology that seriously works for you, not only at home but also in the classroom! If technology could accurately read human facial expressions the learning possibilities could be endless. For example, think about that one story that you're forced to read that you just can't understand and brings out all your frustrations, with facial expression recognition you probably will never be so frustated again. The use of technology to read the emotional expressions of the students in a classroom is unbelievably valuable.
Technology in the classroom has already begun to advance rapidly with educational websites such as ; Google Classroom, Edulastic, Khan Academy,and Mathia. The facial recognition technology could enhance a students comprehension to maximum potential. In the passage " Making Mona Lisa Smile" the author states in paragraph 6 line 6,"A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,"Dr Huang predicts."then it could modify the lesson like an effective human instructor.",this kind of technology can possibly boost testing score and even help children falling behind instead of holding them back another year. The text also states in paragraph 6 line 10 that ;"Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communcation,"notes Dr. Huang.". This example actually explains alot of real world issues in the classroom, such as the fact that some students refuse to even try to communicate their confusion or boredom in the classroom so then they often disengage in the lesson and miss every part that would be essential to reaching standards created by the state.
Many parents or administrators may not agree that this sounds real or possible, but the logic is right before our eyes. In the text the author states how the technology performs the task of reading emotional appeals. For example, in paragraph 3 line 1 the author says,"The process begins when the com puter constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. Movement of one or more muscles is called an "action unit". So apparently this process goes beyond just looking at the face,but actually looking for the movements in facial muscles. The author also talks about the muscles that present certain emotions such as the ; the muscles above your eyes (frontalis oars lateralis) raise when you're surprised,the muscles around your mouth (orbicularis oris) tightens your lips when you're angry, and more. This shows that the computer breaks facial expressions down to a science.
So now what do you think? Computers advance more and more everyday, however facial recognition may just be the beginning. Learning in classroom has become based on all technology in many different forms. Facial tachnology will broaden our horizons with better test scores and happier students that can understand the material evn better than before! The use of technology to read the emotional expressions of the students in a classroom could be a life changing improvement in the 21st century since every student has different wants and needs as far their education. | 3 |
Since World War II we have been heavily dependent on the modern day transpotation: the car. Some say the car is an innovative and convienent method of transportation, while others say that it will be the end of the environment. As the evidence indicates, there are advantages to limiting car usage.
Dissenters of the idea claim to say that limiting car usage will negatively impact the car industry, but it doesn't. Limiting car usage doesn't mean that people will have to stop buying cars; it simply means that they will have to find a different method of transporation. Source 2 says that in Paris on certain days motorist, who had an odd or even license plate number, had to leave their cars at home and find an alternative method of transportation. Does the evidence demonstrate an impact to car companies? Did they have a financial deficit due to their lack of buyers? The answer is simple: no, because they didn't ban the use of cars. Also, car companies can well benefit from places that limit car usage but allow hybrid cars; this allows for an increase in revenue. Most car companies in today's society model hybrid cars that run on primarily electricity and gas. In Paris, they made exceptions "for plug-in cars, hybrids, and cars carrying three or more passengers (Source 2)". These exceptions actually promote the buying of hybrid cars! This will boost the economic profit of the car companies, not damage it. Limiting car usage does not affect car companies, but instead supports it.
The limitation of car usage betters the environment. Cars emit greenhouse gases in the atmosphere faster than they can be removed. This causes health problems in living organisms and pollution of ecosystems. Cars are liable for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe and 50 percent in areas in the U.S. as Source 1 states. People are playing with the balance of nature and if its not fixed then humans are as good as dead; this is why the implementation of limiting car usage benefits people. The effects of this can be seen in Bogota, Colombia, whose goal is to reduce smog and promote alternative transporation (Source 3), and Paris, where intense smog covered the enitre city: "The smog rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world.(Source 2)" The source explains that cold nights and warm days trapped in car emissions and after a few days of reducing car usage the air cleared up. This shows the effectiveness of the limiations of car usage.
The limiting of cars also boosts community wellness. The people who experienced this regulation had positive views on the matter and even on rainy days they participated! Bogota, Colombia has gone into its third year of banning cars and the turnouts of the pariticipation were large, with two other Colombian cities joining and municipal authorities from other countries to view the event (Source 3). The evidence show that limiting cars wasn't opposed by the people, in fact, other countries were wanting to get in on the action. This limiting of car usage really cuts down on traffic congestion and new community projects have been established to ease the transition to alternative transportation. Heidrun Walter, mentioned in Source 1, syas that when she had her car she always tense and stressed and is happy with the change. The source also mentions that the "swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drown out the occasional distant motor (Source 1)." This shows that the limitation of car usage greatly enchances the wellness of the community and promotes a safe and stress-free environment for the people.
In summation, the limitation of car usage doesn't negatively impact car companies, but instead increases hybrid car sale revenue, echances community wellness, betters the environment. The things that can be accomplished with this regulation only has benefits for everyone. With this in mind, why not implement this ideal in order to better the lives of not only this generation but the future leaders of the world? | 4 |
Driverless cars are not a new idea in the modern world, as they have been in development and thoughts in engineer's minds since more advanced automobile technology was introduced. Although there are some concerns with liabilty matters if there were to be an incident witht the car and the passengers were to be injured, "driverless" cars are currently aiding drivers with ways to stay safer on the road. If they were to be further developed, driverless cars could potenially change the way humans transport themselves for the better. Therfore, driverless cars should be further developed, but only to the extent of which there is still a driver present, ready to take over in the case of an accident.
Although there are some potential risks when driving a "driverless" car, the positives outweight the negatives. There are situations in which a human alone cannot drive, they need assistance in order to safely arrivve to their destination.
Say for example, that a family chose to take a roadtrip from southern Texas all the way to northern Michigan. In order for them to arrive at a reasonable time and still be able to sightsee, the driver(s) would have to either take breaks or interchange drivers periodically in order to get rest, as driving is very mentally draining. With driverless cars, the driver(s) would be able to advance much further without having to stop, as the driver is no longer the one that is fully controling the car, making traveling a much quicker process. This goes for all sorts of travel. If there is weather that is very difficult to drive through, like snow, even if the driver was not educated how to safely drive through snow, the car itself could be programmed to drive through difficult terrain and transport the drivers safely. Cars eveywhere could make the driving process an easier one.
Another benefit of driverless cars could be saving the lives of those driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs. Although driving under the influence is against the law, unfortunately, many people choose not to comply with this law and end up getting killed in an accident. Currently, "driverless" cars can "steer, accelerate, and brake themselves" and one car has also been programed to make the driver's seat vibrate when the vehicle is about to hit an object. If all of these upgrades and more are put into one car, it could help save the life of a person who could not complete these tasks on their own. However, if the public begins to see this sort of development as a loophole to drive while they are drunk, this could cause more people to do so and taking away more lives in the process.
A large part of the debate of drivers versus no drivers is the problem of liabilty. If a driver were to be injured while traveling in the driverless cars, who would take the blame? It really depends on the situation. If the technology fails while the driver is being careful and attentive to always be ready to take over, then the liablity would go to the manufactuer of the car and that company. If the driver was being careless and not paying attention to anything that was going on, then it becomes the problem of the driver. If car companies were to develop "driverless" cars, I firmly believe that they should only develop it to the point of where the driver can still jump in and take control, as technology can at certain times be unpredictable, while humans have minds and are capable of going beyond their "autopilot".
For a long time, mankind has been searching for ways to make llife as simple and trouble free as possible Driverless cars are another way of doing this, and humans are rapidly finding new ways to make this a possibilty. Driverless cars can bring safety and effiiciency to a driver, such as assisting with long car rides or help save a drunk driver from crashing. Even so, problems with liabilty and interference with the law could occur. For all of these reasons, driverless cars should be advanced, but only to the extent of still allowing the driver to jump in in the case of an emergency. | 4 |
No matter wich candidate has the most votes The Electoral College holds the final decission. Even though this makes it unfair to our voters this is a secure way of choosing the next president. Sometimes we are not smart enough to pick the right candidate ourselves. I believe that we should rely on the Electoral College. It is there to make sure that we do not get a president that might over rule and it also avoids run-off elections.
The Electoral College reduces the chance of getting a president that might have intentions of over powering. For instance in Cuba, nothing like The Electoral College exists which is why Fidel Castro is still in charge and does not give the citizens freedom. Although he may not be in full charge, he still rules through his brother. But because of him they have poor food supply, barely any money, shelter is weak, and food is scares. With the Electoral College this would be less likely to happen because the electors process everything before making the final decision. Like stated in Source number three "voters in toss-up states are more likely to pay close attention to the campaign-to really listen to the competing candidates".
"Candidates may have won the popular vote but not won the presidency" says source two. This makes it unfair to voters. On top of that, The Electoral College avoids Run-off elections. "Avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast" says Source three. Nixon and Clinton for example had fourty-three percent of the popular votes. For a candidate who can not run their state The Electoral College may turn off voters. When candidates seem to be tied or are about to be tied it complecates the process and so it is reduced by The Electoral College.
I support The Electoral College becuase of the reduced chance of getting a president with over powering intentions and it avoids run-off elections. | 2 |
Driverless cars would be a bad idea in my opinion. There has been a lot of television shows and movies about cars that could drive themselves. There are not any truly driverless cars yet. Google cars still alert the driver for problems like pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues. Other problems may occur such as complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents.
Now a days cars have senors. They detect and respon to the danger of out-of-control skids or rollovers. They apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine. Accidents could still happen even with these advancements. Human drivers couldn't manage to stop or slow down alone. These senors do not stop the drivers to get into accidents.
In the US, the states California, Nevada, Florida, and the Distract of Columbia have allowed limited use of semi-autonomous cars. Manufacturers beieve that more states will follow when they prove that cars are reliably safe. Most states focus on the law that keeps drivers, assengers, and pedestraians safe. Lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers. In most states it is illegal to even test computer driven cars.
To have computer driven cars, manufacturers would have to go through a lot of work with the people and the government. If the technology fails and someone is injured, they would not know who is at fault. That would be a lot of money wasted for the driver or the manufacturer. If traffic laws change then new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident. A lot of people wouldn't like going through change and would just rather depend on thierselves.
Driverless cars would be a waste of time and money. It would change the way people live and how depandable they are on technology. Drivers should be able to be in control of thier car. They should remain alert and be ready to take over when situation requires. No truly computer driven car has existed. Humans should not be that depandant on technology. | 3 |
There are many ways and oppinions that this may be put in but I say that this is valuable. This is valuable because if you were taking a drama class you could understand the real meaning of anothers feelings and become a more proffesional actor if you were to persue that career."Constantin, a renowned drama coach, had his actors carefully reproduce smiling and frowning as a way of creating these emotions on stage." This device would be used as an educatonal purpose as one of it's uses but it can be used for other thing's aswell. You can also use it during a surgery.
For instance, if you were performing surgery on a person and he/ she decides to all of a sudden show sighns of pain through the device they can quickly give another dose of pain medicine and more gas to make the patient go back to sleep.
Again there are many uses for this device and I agree that it should read student's emotional expressions because it would be benefitial and others would be of the understanding of one anothers feelings. This valuable information can also help students if one is feeling sad then a counselor can help. This may even save lives in the future, such as if someone is very suspicous the technology can read there emotional state and may even predict what they coulve done in the future to hurt somebody. This could even detect wther a person is on alchohol or under the influence of drugs.
This new technology is down right phenominal and I hope this proceeds to be a succesful type of technology for the future of humanity. | 2 |
Would you like to help animals that have been shipped over sea?If you would like to thier is a program for it,the name of the program is Seagoing Cowboys.In this program you would help animals that have been shipped over sea.You should join the program because,you get to help animals,and you get to do fun things.
In 1945,world war 2 was over,most of the countries were left in runis.To make these counties recover their,food, and animals and more, they hired "Seagoing Cowboys".Don and I decidce to sign up for it because it was a good cause. All you have to do was feed and watered two or three times a day.My job was to check on all the animals every hour.
I also had time to have fun on board.We got to play baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds.We only got to have fun on return trips.Table-tennis touraments,fencing,boxing,reading,whittling,and games also helped pass the time.I also enjoyed spending time with Don.
In conclusion,I thought being in the Seagoing Cowboy program was a great opportunity for me.This program opened up the world to me.I think everybody in the united state should help out. This program was great in i hope i inspiered you to be in the program. | 2 |
Dear Senator,
I am arguing in favor of changing the Electoral College to the election of by popular vote. The process of the votes going through the various different places until it finally gets counted and determined who wins the state is unneccesary. The system is not even fair, for example in the year 2000 Al Gore had one the popular vote by 60%. Unfortunatley he lost the presidency because he did not win the the votes of the Electoral College. For a counry that is ran by the people, a vote of over 50% should always win. When you take into consideration how big the United States are, then cut that into half it is still a remarkable amount. Now picture a little over half the people in the United States voting for the same thing.
This process led to the "biggest election crisis in a century" says Bradford Plumer. According to this source the system can also allow for much worse. He even says that at the most basic level the Electoral college is unfair to voters because of the Winner-take-allsystem that occurs in each state. For the purpose of common sense why would we as a republic use a system that is "unfair"?
Richard A. Posner says that the method of using the Electoral College method may even restrain potential voters for a specific candidate. All because they know that they're votes will have little to no impact on the outcome of the election. This also leads to the fact that would have no logical reason to pay attention to the campaign they would've picked. Plumer quotes that " the Electoral College is outdated,unfair, and that Bob Dole was right in saying that we as acounty should abolish the Electoral College".
When everything is added up the same words such as unfair,outdated,useless, and unnessary keep coimg up on this topic. Not everybody in this country enjoys the use of the Electoral College and I strongly feel that eventually in this country the Electoral college will be left in the past and new methods of voting will be of greater use. | 2 |
Being able to learn and see more things about our solar system is one of our best accomplishments as humans. We sometimes dont appreciate it as much as we should. Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit no matter the dangers because it can teach us more about the planets in our solar system, introduce us to new forms of life, and can improve our ability to discover more things.
Going to Venus manually can be one of the solutions to this problem of computers being delicate when it comes to extreme physical conditions. We can gather alot of information by technology, but if we get someone there to see everything with their own eyes and be able to explain things can cause more information to be taken in. NASA is currently working on different ideas to so they can gather more information on "Earth's Twin". Our own curiosity has lead us to these times by encouraging us to want to find out more about not just Venus, but many other planets. By doing this we are just improving our ability to explore and discover.
The text 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." This is what lead me to believe that we should try to keep pushing for more and more. Our solar system is a mysterious place and we have more places to see and learn about. | 1 |
Alien's have been a question many astronauts and people from all around the world have been wondering about for ages. But do they actually exsit? A few years ago NASA discovered what seemed to look like a face on Mar's surface. Many think that the so called "Face" was created by alien's. But others think it was just created by natural causes just like how some landforms are created on Earth. How do you think that the formation was created?
So far NASA hasn't discovered any alien markings or any other form of life on other planets. This is one of the reasons why the formation was created by natural causes and not by alien's. Just like on Earth we discover something new every day, such as new landforms and new natural resources. The formation couldn't of been formed by alien's because where did they get the tools to make it? If aliens exsited, i think we would have more evidence.
Alien's don't exsit becuase we would have found some evidence of diffrent life on diffrent planet's by now. If their are no aliens then their are no alien made objects on Mars. Alien's probably would have found a better communication rought then sending us weird landforms that dont have much meaning at all.
Why of all things would the aliens create a face? Even if aliens did exsit i don't think it is their goal in their life to scare us humans. They would probably make something more reasonable, like a house or something like a shelter.
Along with the formation there are also many landforms on earth that are similar. Such as the Grand Cannon and things like that. Think if the humans lived on Mars and we came to Earth and saw the Grand Cannon we would automatically think that there must be life here since there is no other way this could have been formed. Just as we believe there is life on Mars we would assume their is life here. Untill their is more evidence about alien's we should not believe that they exsit.
As it says in the artical "What the picture actually shows is the Maritian equivalent of a buttle or mesa-landforms common around the American West." This landform represents many of the already discovered landforms on earth such as the Grand Cannon and their is no official evidence that aliens exsit this is obviously a naturally formed landform and not created by aliens. | 2 |
Dear Senator,
I believe that we should keep the Electoral College voting instead of changing it because it produces a clear winner, shows what percentage of the state voted for whom and is easier to count the votes.
It produces a clear winner because instead of doing it by numbers it is by percentages. If you see it in percntages you will know right away. If we were to change it to most popular vote you would not get an exact number so you would have to tally up and see who is the winner. It states that it produces a clear winner by the percentages.
It shows what state voted for whom. What I mean by that is on the map it will show if the state voted more for Republican or Democratic. If 60% of the state voted for a Republican than it shows what percent. Instead of counting out those long numbers they can just add up all the percentages and get their winner right there.
It is a lot easier to count all the votes because if it shows that 60% of the state voted for Republican than that goes into the books. So instead of counting each and every vote they just add up all the percentages and then they have their clear winner.
If we were to change to most popular vote it would not be fair because it does not show an exact number or percentage. It would become another war because if it just shows most popular vot instead of who is really good for the job our world would become an aweful place to live in. You dont know if that person is truly able to be put into that job.
Yes there are some pros and cons to this but would you rather be put into office for most popular votes, not the most votes. Or would you rather be put into office saying I beat this guy in the race and I won fair and square.
We should keep the Electoral Collage in session because it produces a clear winner, showes a percentage of votes for each state and is a lot easier to count all the votes. Lets not change what is already going well for us. Keep it going. Dont stop it now.
Sincerly,
PROPER_NAME | 1 |
For many years people have been debating whether or not to keep the Electoral College or change to election by popular vote for the president of the United States. According to source 1, the electoral college was established as "a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens." There are few positive effects of the Electoral College, however, there are many negative effects. I am in favor of changing the United States' election process to election by popular vote because there are many risks with the Electoral College, the Electoral College is outdated, and lastly, the Electoral College is unfair to voters in many states.
Currently, while using the Electoral College, the United States takes multiple risks. Some of the major risks were stated in source two. One of the major risks included, what of the elector put the vote in for the candidate he wished? Of course no matter what the situation, there will be risks to take. However, when those risks become actions, and happen more than once, people put up a guard and start to question whether or not the process is trustworthy. A sentence in source three declared, "each party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party's nominee (and that trust is rarely betrayed). Americans are expected to trust a slate of electors whom we know little about personally, and trust is a personal thing. Trust is something that has to be earned. Therefore, when our trust is betrayed more than once because of the process the Electoral College, there is no way to earn that trust back once again. Without the Electoral College, this would not be an issue.
Not only is the Electoral College risky, but it is also outdated. The Electoral College was created by the founding fathers, over a century ago. With new technology, and new systems forming, the election process should be more modern. Also, when it was decided to use the Electoral College, there were fewer people in the United States. Currently, in modern day, the population is much greater. A country with a greater population needs a modern election selection.
The Electoral College is very unfair to states that do not have the ability to make an impact in the election. If the election process were changed to elected by popular vote, smaller states would have the ability to make their vote matter.
The Electoral College needs to be changed immediately in able for citizens to stop worrying about taking major risks, so our country as more of a modern election process, and so every vote counts. Changing to election by popualr vote could make the United States a better country. | 3 |
My thoughts on driverless cars are not necessarily against it but I think the world can do without for awhile still, in other words there's no rush to get them out into the public streets. Although it would be very luxurious to have a car the drives itself, the safety issues & tedious appliances still need much work. Google has had driverless cars since 2009 that drove more than half a million miles without crashing but these cars still require human occupation in complicated traffic situations & driveways. I think the smart road system working in hand with the driverless cars would be more efficient but too expensive & requires "massive" upgrades to the roads so the idea was disgarded. So being that the smart cars would be driving on the roads we know of now it would need a pretty excessive amount of sensors to mimic the skill of a human behind the wheel. Google's modified Toyota Prius uses position-estimating sensors in the left rear wheel, rotating senor on the roof, video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, inertial motion sensor, & the LIDAR on the roof that uses laser beams to project a 3D image of the car's surroundings. This is all so that in can mimic human driving ability as closely as possible & there's still much work to be done. BMW's development of "Traffic Jam Assistant" in 2013 was the 'better way' to go about having 'driverless' cars. This car was designed to drive itself standardly & notify the human driver inside when he or she needs to take over the wheel. Some might argue that having a driverless car that still needs you to drive is pointless so the ideas of in-car entertainment & information systems are going around. The ideas of these cars definitely are revolved around luxury & safety but new traffic laws would have to be made for these automobiles driving themselves because if an accident happens who is to blame? I believe there is still more troubleshooting to be as far as having a driverless car on the streets. Most states have even made it illegal to test computer-driven cars with the exception of California, Nevada, Florida, & the District of Columbia who allow limited use of semi-autonomous cars. After these cars are proved to be safe overall, then they will be introduced into the public streets. | 3 |
In the article the author wrote positives and negatives about self driving cars I am going to write about the positives of the slef driving cars bcause in my opinion self driving cars would be a great thing to have.
In this prompt im going to write about self driving cars. I think self driving cars would be a good thing to have because if you have a baby in the car and their bottle fell on the floor you could turn around and get it because you would have a self driving car and you wouldnt have to worry about getting in a wreck because the self driving cars like the prius have sensors that make a three D model of evrything around it so it can drive like a normal human did. I think that everyone should have a self driving car because they seem to be a safer car if the driver gets distracted easily. I also think they would be safer because googles self driving cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash. Google cars are not truly drivless the car alerts the driver when its pulling in or out of a driveway, dealing with complicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents. An example about the Toyota prius being safe " spinning sensor on the roof, dubbed lidar , it uses laser beams to form a constantly updating 3-D model of the cars surroundings. The combination of all this input is necessary for the driverless car to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel.
Sensors on the self driving cars have started in the 1980's automakers made speed sensors for the antilock brakes. Within 10 years the sensors had become more advanced to detect and respondto the danger of out-of-control skids or rollovers. The information from the sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine , allowing far better response and control than a human driver could manage alone. All the improvments to computer software and hardware is making driving safer and leading to cars that can handle more and more driving tasks on their own.
Everything in those two paragraphs are telling about how safe the self driving cars are and how they operate and in the last paragrach they talk about how they are becoming better with all of the computer software and hardware improving. All of this information is why I believe having a self driving car would be safe and a good idea. | 2 |
Venus is the second planet from our. while Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point the earth, it has proved a very challening place to examine more closely. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such a environment would crush even a sunmarine accustomed to diving to mthe deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals, also notable, Venus has he hottest surface temperture of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun.
Astronomers are fascinated bby Venus because it may well once have been the most earth-like planet in our solar syetem. Long ago, Venus was probably coverd largely with oceans and could be supported various forms of life, just like Earth. Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. The value of returning to Venus seems indisputable, but what are the options for making such a mission both safe and scientifcally productive.. | 1 |
Dear senator i was wondering what the electoral college was. And iv noticed that its unfair .Because of the winner-take-all system,the posablet of a tie. of couser there are more reasons but those are the top two.
Many american people think the electoral college is unfair Because of the winner-takes-all system. Which is when candates dont spend time in state they know there not going to win. For example in the 2000 campaign seventeen states didnt get to see who they where even voting for. And some of the largest media markets didnt see a campaign ad. Ever one should at least get to see who mit be running the U.S.A. If the president was picked on most poppler vote the people would see who there voting for and also see what there are plans are for the U.S.
Another big reason the electoral college should be changed is because of the posablet of a tie. Many people are worried about this because the responablaite of chocing the president would be the house of represantives. Which is unfair because each state has only one vote. For example let say florida represenates 400,000 people, they would have as much to say to texas who represenates 1 millon people. But if the president was chocien by polpular vote then there could never be a tie and voter would have a changes to vote for who they really want.
All and all the electrol college should be changed. Because of the winner takes all system and the posablet of tie. The college has worked for a long time now but i think the american people are ready for a change. | 2 |
The "Face" was not made by aliens. I know this for three reasons. One, it's just a natural form. Two, they have yet to be actually seen. Three, they should have found us by now. Here's how I know.
The "Face" is simply a natural form. One, it looks just like a mesa. It most likely has been there by just nature in some form. Two, there are no specific details from being "hand made." It the aliens created it don't you think they would make it more detailed. It is just unreasonable for it to be made by aliens.
If there are aliens why have we yet to see them. One, in all the images there is absolutely no sign of them. We have so many images with zero sign of them. Two, with all our high technology we would've found them by now. We are able to create so many crazy things, but not see a simple alien? That to me is insane.
At least they wouldve found us. One, with all the suff we got goin on in
space don't you think the would've noticed us by now. Two, if they can do all these supernatural things in space and on Earth like the so-called crop circles dont you think they would stop the hiding? If the do all these things why can't they just show us who the credit goes to?
The "Face" was not made by aliens. I know this for the reasons above. The "Face" is a natural form. We have yet to see these aliens. Also, at the least they wouldve found us. Therefore, I know aliens are not real and that thing is a mesa. | 2 |
I am all for Thomas Huang new invation. I think that the FACS is a grate invation we finaly have a way to see how people are feeling just by this computer. How this device works is that the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face, then studys all 44 major muscles. Moving one or more mucsles is called an action unit. After that Dr. Huang relies on Dr. Pual Eckman, the creator of FACS to find out how the preson is feeling.
The FACS software can track facial movements even if your not smiling as broadly. Just when you think that is all it can do it can also identify mixed emotions each exspession is compared to a nertarl face showing on emotion. We humans can also do this, but we would have trouble describing each facial trait. Dr. Huang wants to do a test on Mona Lsa to see if she is really smiling or not. There going to use the software to see if it can tell use if she is or not.
as you can see this software is a grate tool i can see this devise helping use out a lot in the futer. If you are interested in doing this then go look at your self and then ask your partner if he or she knows what your feeling right now. I fell like we should have more people like Dr. Huang, and Dr Paul Eckman cuase the world is changing and we need to try to keep up and not fall be hind. Life is a intresting thing and what you do with it is all up to you. | 1 |
The Electoral College is a process which occurs in the United States to help determine the president for the next four years of the entire nation. It is a very controversial topic and a plethora of people want to disregard the Electoral College. People want to vote for their president, but ultimately they are voting for the electors of the state who represent the president in the end. The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. It makes the voters feel like they have less power when they are voting and when people of a nation feel that way, they lose interest and lose the desire to vote for their country because they feel like their vote will not count or have and affect.
At the end of paragraph 10, two questions are asked, "Can voters control whom their electors vote for?" and "Do voters get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong candidate?". The answers were;not always and sometimes. If a system or process confuses people enough where they vote for the wrong candidate they desired, then that system needs to go. That system is the Electoral College.
The single best argument against the electoral college is the disaster factor. With a name like that, you know this system cannot be good. Also, 3 high ranking officials and a couple of them that opposed the electoral college, were former presidents. They were Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and Bob Dole. The electorals confused system works like this. Voters vote for a slate of electors who in turn are the ones who elect the president. Is'nt the whole point of the election to vote for your candidate that you would like to win, and not his employees'? When a state votes for a president and has their majority vote, then the amount of electors in the state are what counts towards the voting polls. The state electors could be anyone not holding office at that time. Furthermore, electoral votes can possible end in a tie due to the fact that there is an even number of electors, 568, which is a big worry in the result of the election. Compared to electoral votes, there is only 55 representatives in California, but there is 35 million people in the state. A tie almost guarenteed, will not happen with that comparison.
A winner take all system is in play with the elcectoral college process. The system consists of when a president wins an election then all electors part or even somewhat representing that candidate are now with the president. Also bigger states have more representatives and the candiates focus more on those staes to try and win them over. it leaves the smaller states like Wyoming and South Dakota, for example, to be left out of the equation and not be focused on too much in the process.
All in all, the elctorall college and process needs to be abolished and is not fair to the people of the nation voting and being taken advantage of. | 4 |
Wow, wouldn't you think that exlporing the sea, going to volcanoes, and jumping out of planes would be fun? Well being a NASA scientist can be as fun. Don't you think it would be very intersting seeing what is in space? Im here to tell you that the Face is a natural landform.
I have several claims to support my argument that the Face is a natural landform. Many people believed that the Face was created by aliens, but have they seen the aliens? How would they know that the aliens did it if they didn't see them do it? What if it's just a illusion and peole think it's a face? They dont have enough proof.
There are many evidence that I've found that my staements are true. In the article it states that " Thousands of anxious web sufers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, reavealing.... a natural landform. There was no aliens monument after all." It also states that " the camrea on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the Face. Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze." If they didn't know for sure why would they think aliens did it?
That's why the Face is just a natural landform. There are no such thing as aliens. The Face is just something created by nature and nothing elese. People need to start think about what they say. | 2 |
In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars. The author explains how driverless cars have been introduced. The author also explains what possible difficulties or roadblocks the autonomous (or driverless) technology in driverless cars will encounter. After thoroughly reading the article, I have formulated my stance on driverless (autonomous) cars. I believe that driverless cars are the future of technology, will be more effecient, and will ultimately lead to less accidents when fully implemented.
The article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" states the following:
"In the 1980s, automakers used speed sensors at the wheels in the
creation of antilock brakes."
After which, the article states the following:
"Within 10 years, those sensors had become more advanced to detect
and respond to the danger of out-of-control skids and rollovers."
The aforementioned quotes from the article show that technology in cars are steadily improving. These pieces of technology are growing more advanced every year.
As a society, we face three options. Of which, we may only choose one. The options are as follows: One, we may proceed in development of technology and progress as a whole; two, we may grow stagnant in progression and remain as is; three, we may choose to go backward in progression. I am in favor of progressing in technology and also in autonomous cars.
Autonomous cars will be incredibly more effecient than our current vehicles. In the article, the author states that "The cars [Sergey Brin] foresees would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus." Not only will autonomous cars be more effecient than any system we are currently using, but they will also be more flexible than our current public transportation system. The increased effeciency of fuel would lead to less pollution due to less fuel being consumed by each car. This is undoubtedly a large, positive aspect to autonomous cars. Overall, the combination of increased effeciency and increased flexibility leaves the outlook on developing autonomous cars very promising.
Implementing a full system of driverless cars will ultimately lead to less accidents. The majority of car accidents are known to be caused by human error. When implementing a system of driverless cars, there will be a fewer number of errors than occur in a system of human drivers. Even if an autonomous car were to have a bug in the programming, it is easily fixed. Once the bug is fixed, it no longer is an issue. However, with humans, there is the need to train every driver. Even then, human drivers still have room for error. A system of autonomous cars would largly decrease the number of accidents and would not require individual programming. Due to this, we could also automate several driving jobs, filling in any possible job vacancies.
I believe that driverless cars are the future of technology. The only path to take is forward. I also believe they will be more effecient. It is said that they will require only half the fuel consumed as of now. Finally, I believe it will ultimately lead to less accidents when fully implemented. Autonomous cars are far more predictable and offer less opportunity for errors. It would be a wise decision to explore the future of driverless cars and use this futuristic technology to our advantage. | 4 |
The pursuit of the dangers includethings such as gravity,temperature,air pressure. The gravity because of in paragraph 5 the author made an example to a vehicle probably a space rover hovering above the surface. The text states that "Just like jet airlplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms,a vehicle hovering over venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions but staying up and out of there way". Bascaily saying that the vehicle would have hard time to stay on the ground. The temperature would be as The text states in paragraph 5 "around 170 degrees fahrenheit". Temperatures would be scoiling hot. Air pressure would be another danger because you can only take so much pressure before you got to back to the surface. As the text states it once again in paragraph 5 " would be close to sea level ". I do agree with the author as he says in the text "Not easy conditions,but survivable for humans. There has been some movies about living on harsh conditions where astronauts had to live on planets with harsh conditions. So I do understand where the author is coming from that it could be possible if earth does die off and we are stuck to move to venus. In conclusion we are humans we have been everything from adam and eve to hilter taking over germany and forming the once all-mighty nazis to people getting mass murders in chicago to trump bulidng a wall. If humans been to that I think we can survive living on venus. | 1 |
Instead of having the Elcetoral College you should change it to the popular votes because the people vote for who they want as president not for who will be put in as president. It should be all about the people and what they want and who they want as the leader of the country not who the Electoral College puts in the office. Also the Electoral College is a process not a place but their are people that run the Electoral College and they put in who they want and not who the people want.
The counting of the electoral votes is done by Congress. Also the Electoral College consists of 538 electors. "In Texas, for instance, and wanted to vote for John Kerry, youd vote for a slate of 34 Democratic electors pledged to Kerry." The votes would go to be electoral votes instead of what the people. Someone can be voted in to office by the peoples vote but it has to be that the other person might get in by the electoral votes instead of the individual votes.
The electoral vote overrule the peoples votes. For example "Obama received 61.7 precent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 percentof the popular votes cast for him and Romney." It just is not fair for the people to vote for who they want as president and the Electoral College puts who they want in instead who people want in office. The people want who they want not who you put in office. In the state of Florida there are 29 electoral votes, Texas there are 38, California has 55.
These are reasons why the Electoral College should be changed to the election of the popular votes. It is only fair to do that instead of having it as someone that the people did not want in office. The electoral votes do not have to be there they just have them to put who Congress want in office. They do not care about the people they care about themselves. | 1 |
Cars are the main cause of pollution in major cities. Cities are covered in smog from gas emmisions from a car's exhaust. This is not good for the environment. Something must be done about this. If the usage of cars is cut down, then the amout of pollution in the air will be less. A less usage of cars allows people to have a clean community and helps the environment.
In Germany, there is a small community that is completely car-free. This community, Vauban, has about 5,500 residents, and not a single one of them use a car. This community is very clean and all of the people that live there are happy. Just think, what if every family in Vauban had a car? It would completely change this happy, clean community. There would be a lot more pollution and more stressful citizens. More and more small towns are beginning to ditch the cars for walking and taking a bicycle.
More cities are starting to have car-free days to help with the pollution problems that are caused by automobile engines. Examples of these cities include Paris, France and Bogota, Colombia. Pollution is starting to be a big problem in big cities like these, so they have decided to take action. Pollution is destroying our atmosphere. The gases that are released from the exhaust of car engines slowly deteriorates the layer of atmosphere of our world. If cars begin to be frequently used like they are now, the atmosphere may become damaged beyond the condition for being fixed. Earth only has one atmosphere, so once it's gone, we can't get it back.
People in the United States are beginning to cut back on the number of people who drive cars. The U.S. has been one of the leading country with the number of people who drive cars and the amount of pollution, but people have been taking action and going for a greener alternative. In the fourth passage it says, "A study last year found that driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009." A lot of people between 16 and 39 do not even have a driver's license. People are starting to take public transportation and carpool instead of driving their vehicles from point A to point B. With more and more people doing this, it just lessens the amount of emmisions in the atmsophere more. America has passed it prime for driving because of the more and more who are taking action in making a change in the health of our world.
In conclusion, there are many reasons that we should start to lessen the amount of people driving on the road. It just causes pollution and makes the health and well- being of others and the earth worse. People are already beginning to make a change, but we need more than there is to make a difference. | 3 |
Driverless cars have been a theory for a while, but have never been brought to a reality. You can argue that they can be a valueable asset like the driving itself part but it would be way to expensive. Or the new fetures that are being added to newer car models. The fun in the traditional way of drving could be lost with all the new tech people are trying to develope for this new feture.
The ability for a car to drive itself has always been; so far nothing but a theory. But now people are actually trying to make this into a reality with starting from basic perks. The original theory was to build "smart roads" which used a so called simple algarithem of magnets with alternate polarities. This was suppose to be intended for the car to interpret like a binary code as stated in paragraph 3, but later it proved to be to expensive so they turned to a "smart car". Plus the cars needed to be equiped with state of the art sensor tech. that quite frankly wasnt available at the time the thought was originated.
On the other hand cars are being now equiped with the best sensor technology we have so far. For instance BMW announced the development of the "Traffic Jam Assistant". which it was a start to the self drivin car theory but still a ways to go. GM has also developed their own assistent system such as seat vibration when a vehical is in danger of backing into an object. They have also considered placing camaras to watch for unfocused drivers. Telsa has projected a 2016 release of a car that can drive on autopilot 90 percent of the time. Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan are planning to have cars like that release sometime in 2020.
Now i might sound alittle bias but the fun of traditional driving is a possibility of being lost in the new technological advancements. Most people, car lovers ect. could argue that this new self driving feature could only be a hassle. As stated in paragraph 8 "wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive". From my point of view I agree but lets just state the obvious, there has to be a consideration for the law. Would smart cars be able to drive without going on sidewalks, would they be able to recognize traffic lights or even traffic itself ? The question still remains on if an accident were to happen, who's fault would it be ? Would it be the driver's fault or the manufacturer ?
A lot is still un answered with the theory of the smart car like how people would enjoy it. Or the bigger question how much would it cost. But there are upsides to this such as possibly safer driving, less accidents, and even a better parallel parking. | 3 |
In the text the outhor suggest that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despirate the dangers it represents, which is correct. The text explain correcthy each factor that Venus has, it also explain with details what are the dangers that being on Venus presents.
At the begining the text, the author explain where is located Venus and what are some factors about it. Venus is the second planet from the sun. Venus is also the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size. Venus temperature avarage is over 800 degrees Farenheit,and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than wht we experience on our own planet, it means that Venus is unable to have humans living there, because the factors like temperature, water, and ways to get food are so complicated. The fact of Venus being the second planet from the sun makes it a lot more dangerous for a human to be there.
Scientifics explain that Venus has the hottes surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun. People ask "Why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface?", well Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system, it means that Venus was the most similiar of the 8 planets in the solar system that looks more similar to the Earth, they belief that really long time ago Venus was covered with oceans and it could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters, which is another idea that makes the author think about know more about Venus.
Now The National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA) has one particular compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. The NASA has some projects in mind to do one of them is to send mechanical computers to Venus to take pictures and videos that way they can have a better idea of how Venus looks like. They are trying to use the same mechanical computers that they use during World War II, because mechanical parts can be made more resistant to preassure,heat, and other forces, it means that the NASA plans to send an electronic device to Venus just to see the place and star planning a visit, the would adap the device that way it could resist the different factor that are fount on Venus.
Venus has value , not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself,but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. | 1 |
Different places from all over the world have different ways of choosing a leader . In the U.S we run a anachronism ,non-democratic method of selecting a president . When choosing a president it is a competition between Democrats and republicans . I think it is best to keep the Electoral college because it wouldnt be fair to citizens , and its a thrill for the presidents to share there thoughts for upcoming events to change the world.
The U.S is supposably a free country , everyone has a right to vote , and freedom of speech ; if congress decides to not do electoral college , then it wouldnt be fair to citizens .Reason being is that , youd be hipocrytical , saying everyone has a right but you wouldnt let citizens pick who they would like to have run for president . People , would loose trust in the U.S if they didnt get a chance to atleast vote for president , everyone would be against U.S and most likely leave . Even if the people who voted for the future president theyd like didnt win they still will be satisfied enough , because they tried .
When future presidents go up for election they become nervous , start to sweat , start to think twice about what they wanna say ,how are they gonna propose what to say , and to think are they really gonna keep their promise ? They wanna share so much with us ; it becomes a thrill going up for competion . To know what to say , to bring people in , to share his/hers thoughts to change the world we live in . If congress were to change that , they wouldnt get a chance to share all there ideas with us , to get to know us as a family, to what we would like to help others . Without there annoying pep talks how do we know they dont wanna ruin the world ? Yeah its annoying but its worth standing there or watching it on telivision to hear , to feel the excitement of there ideas to help the low class , to help every class not evan the low class , its everyone to help everyone in the own ways .
The reasons for keeping the electoral college are that it really wouldnt be fair to citizens , and the thrill for upcoming presidents wouldnt be able to share there wonderful thoughts to change billions of lifes .Think of all the people that will be devistated of how the U.S changed the ways we vote . Having someone to run our country is very important , if we change our ways of electing , who knows what disaster will live in next ? | 2 |
Do you think the Face on Mars is a legit person or just a landscape? Is it just mother nature pulling tricks on us? I think it's just a landscape trick. It happens all the time. Like the potatoe with a face on it. Here is why. First, the face doesnt seem to have a body attached to it. Second it looks like it is attached to the ground and, third there has been no sign of life on mars.
First of all th face looks like it was sculpted. It has no body that can be seen. Unless it is a decatetated head. The land scape couldv'e played an trick on us.
Second of all It looks attached to the ground. If it were a readl head the end outline wouldnt be smoothed in to the ground. It would be laying on top and have a shadow showing the back side the the skull.
Third, there have been no sign of life on mars. Yes, we have found flowing water but we have not found any type of living orgamisim.
So here is why I think that the landscape is playing illousions on us. First, The face looks scultped. Second, It lookes attached to the ground and third, there is no sign of life on mars. | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.