full_text stringlengths 737 20.5k | score int64 0 5 |
|---|---|
In the article, the author states that, while Venus may be extreamly dangerous, studying Venus would be a worthy persuit for scientists. In paragraph 3 of the article the author describes the many dangers on Venus and how those dangers would effect attempts to study it's surface, these dangers include an atmosphere that is almost 97 percent carbon diocide, clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venuses atmosphere, a surface temperature of over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and an atmosheric pressure level that is 90 times greater than here on Earth. While the author clearly explains the dangers of Venus, in paragraph 4 he states reasons of why Venus should be studied. In his reasons he states that Venuses surface is a lot like Earths, with valleys, mountains, and craters. The author also states that some scientists believe Venus, at one point of time, may have been able to support various forms of life like our Earth,
In paragraphs 5, 6, and 7 the author explains scientists theories on how to send humans to study Venus without having to worry about the ground level dangers. One of these theories consists of having the scientists float 30 or so miles above Venuses surface and studying the planet from there. While this theory keeps the scientist safe from Venuses harsh conditions it also provides them with very limited information about Venuses surface, provided that most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere rendering photography and videography records of Venuses surface useless. While this theory seems unable to work out, that doesn't stop scientist from thinking of more ways to study Earths "twin".
In the final paragraph of the article the author states that studying Venus will not only allow us to learn more about the planet itself, but it is likely to lead us to discover newer ways to conquer the harsh enviroments of other planets and continue to learn more about the vast universe we live in. | 2 |
Have you herd of the cowboy that rode the waves in the pacific ocean? Well if you have not I will tell you about him and his long trips. He grew up on a farm so that is why he is such a hard worker. In 1945 the war was over in urop and 44 regions came toghter to help all over the other countrys that were Europ and needed re- built. So that is when Luke comes in. His freind over in Europ invited him to try one trip. After one trip he was in love with helping people by going over sea`s and giving people cattle. He was on late night watch and it was rainy,he slipped of the latter and hit a metal pice the broke his ribs. After that in 1947 he was discharged from the boat and his duty so he went back home to the U.S.A. The war was over then and he worked two jobs. Do you belive that Luke and his freinds really rode the waves of the pacific ocean and did it six-teen times? Would go out there and go out there and do it yourself? Well I would and I would like to help others and there famly and freinds. | 0 |
Is there ever going to be a day when you can not go outside and enjoy some fresh air- enjoying nature and the beauty it provides? What if the next day we go outside and everyone has to to wear a mask or something over their face because the air is no longer heathy to breath due to too much emmission from automobiles? Luckily, there are some was to prevent this from ever becoming a reality in every day life. At first, the thought of limiting car usage may seem unappealing especially considering the fact on how great an affect our cars have in our livers. Yet, not all those affects are good ones. Everywhere around the world, people use some kind of automobile to get from point A to point B and so on but maybe there are other solutions. In the first source, In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars, it states that limiting car useage is doable and done comfortably. The source states that in Vauban, 70 percent of families do not own cars and 57 percent sold a car to move there.
Is it actually possable to live life regularly without using a car regularly? This is one question that might be asked by a lot of people hearing about the idea of car limitation. In source 2, it tells us that Paris, after days of near-record pollution, enforced a partial driving ban to clear up the air in the global city. On one day, all mororists with even numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home and on the following day the same applied to odd numbered plates or suffer a 22-euro ($31) fine. The source states that almost 4,000 drivers were fined and 27 people had their cars impounded for their reaction to the fine. With that aside, Congestion was down by 60 percent in Paris. Knowing this information, it is a lot easier to realize just how dramatic of a change limitation of cars would be to most people; though, the benifits were dramatic aswell.
Of course it would seem to be way too impractical to up and abandon all cars and walk and/or bike everywhere. Alternative transportation is the key, at least in Bogota, Columbia. Source 3 states that its been the third straight year cars have been banned with only busses and taxies permitted for the Day Without Cars in the capitol city of 7 million. Violators of the ban were faces $25 fines for the goal to promote alternate transportation and reduce smog.
Considering all this information provided by the sources, car limitation would be very benificial to the earth and the problems of pollution we are all facing. Presenting alternative transprotation and a ban on cars would be a very dramatic switch of lifestyle to basically everyone but it seems, at the rate air quality and smog is becoming more and more a problem, that it would be worth the switch. If this ever does become an everyday lifestyle, it certanly will not happen in just a week. The switch would most likely gradually work its way into everyones lifes until it seems as if thats how it always has been. | 2 |
A new program, the Facial Action Coding System, regonizes facial emotions. It can show the different emotions on a person's face by the different muscles they're using. Prof. Thomas Huang's facial recognition technology is valuable for a classroom. It would show whether or not a student is enjoying the lesson and adjust lessons to the liking of the student.
First, the program could understand humans better to fit our needs. The article says, ""Most human comunication is nonverbal, including emotional communication," notes Dr. Huang. "So computers need to understand that, too."" This is telling how computers need to better understand how humans work, as in the different ways we convey emotions and thought. It also needs to know the different varients of human emotion. The article states, "By weighing the diffferent units, the software can even identify mixed emotions. each expression is compared against a neutral face." This explains how the program wouldn't show a regular "happy" emotion and compare a human's to it, but instead start with no emotion and see which muscles are used to find the emotion. For example, the article states, "She's 83 precent happy, 9 percent disgust, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry." That's the emotion of da Vinici's painting, "Mona Lisa". The software states exaclty what her emotions are, not just one emotion.
Then, the program could act like a teacher and fix lessons to better the student. The article says, ""A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," Dr. Huang predicts. "Then it could modifty the lesson, like an effective human instructor."" This shows that Dr. Huang believes that his technology could, in the future, rearrange lessons and work them for the student better when working on computers. The article then states, "For example, if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different." The technology would personalize the computer to fit the user better, making it beneficial for a student.
The software helps identify different emotions in humans, including the "Mona Lisa". It can show different varieties of human emotions and then find if someone is enjoying what they're seeing online. This helps students by the program recognizing how they're feeling about lessons, then adjusting them to fit their needs. The program would really make a big difference for online teaching. | 3 |
Have you Ever wanted to round up the cattle or take a daring job as a seagoing cowboy? My reasons are that a seagoing cowboy is hardworking, bone breaking and strong personthis is what luke faced In the text "A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves" By Peggy Reif Miller
First why do was a seagoing cowbiy is becuase that he was a heardworking cowboy Don his best friend was the one who Invited him to to go on a cattel boat in Europe. And luke just couldn't say no. At that time many contries were left in the ruins. so he sined up for a seagoing cowboy so it was his best friend Don that made his dream come true
Second why they chose to be a seagoing cowboy is that it is a bone breaking job.So they joined this program becuse they could help the contries that were left in the ruins. This is one reason why people shold perticapate in the UNRRA, And people should join the UNRRA becuase People could help the earth be a better place by giving the people food, or milk a dairy cow.
last why he chose to be a seagoing cowboy is that he is strong I think luke's claim is that this is not an easy task Becuse you will get hurt. The text states" a small strip of metal along the edge stopped his slide, keeping him from flying overboard into the dark Atlanic" This shows that you might be left with a few broken bones, Just a few right?
This shows that this job can be a bone breaking expience. Now you know what a seagoing cowboy is a hardworking, bone breaking, strong kind of a man. | 2 |
Would you ride the waves?
Well im going to be telling you about a man who rode the waves his name is Luke.
Im also going to tell you about him and what he does for a living.
Luke is a person who works two part time jobs which is working at a grocery store and at a bank.
This story alll started one day when his friend Don invited Luke to go to Europe on a cattle boat.
Luke couldn't say no.
He knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime.
In 1945, world war II was in Europe. Many countries in Europe was ruined. In order to help those countries they need to regain thier food supplies, animals, and more.
About 44 nations joind echother to form a UNRRA. UNRRA was hiering "Seagoing cowboys" to watch after the cows, horses, and mules that were being sent oversea. Luke and Don was two of the man who had signed up for the job.
In August 1945, the two men received thier orders which were to report to New Orleans.
They arrived August 14, Luke said, " the day the war on the pacific ocean ended." The men got thier seaman papers a nd then they boarded the SS Charles W. Wooster, was headed to Greece with a cargo with 335 horses plus enough hay and oats to feed them all.
Luke was 18 before they arrived at Greece, whitch ment he could be drafted for military service. " When my draft board had learned that i was on a cattle boat trip, they told me to keep doing that for my service."
Be time he waas discharged it was 1947, Luke made nine trips. The most of any seagoing cowboy.
The boat trips was unexspectivly opportunity for Luke.
Luke said besides helping people, had some side benefits of seeing Europe and china. But seeing Accropolis in Greece was special," Luke said.
It took 2 weeks to cross the atlantic ocean from the eastern coast of the united states of America and about a month to get all the way to china.
Caring for the animals during the crossings kept Luke busy. They had to be fed and watered two or three times a day.
Bales of hay and bags of oats needed to be pulled from the lower holds of the ship.
Stalls had to be cleaned.
So after what i just exsplaind to you would you still be a seagoing cowboy or not. | 2 |
The Electoral College is a controversial topic in the US. This is the system used to elect the president of the United States, but most people (60% of Americans, according to source 1) believe that we shouldn't use this particular system and that we should go with the popular vote instead, while all others are strong in their stance that we should continue its use. Under the Electoral College, it is entirely possible for a Presidential Candidate to win presidency, even with the majority of voters voting for the oposing candidate. We should discard the Electoral College in favor of the popular vote.
The Electoral College is a system that allots a certain amount of electoral votes to each state. Each state is given 2 electoral votes plus another amount of votes which depends on that state's population. The amount of votes ranges from 3 to 55 (source 3). A candidate must recieve 270 out of 538 possible votes. The candidate the electoral votes of a state go to is decided by the majority vote of each individual state. In all states but Maine and Nebraska give a candidate the entirety of their votes if the majority of its citizen votes for them (source 1). Some people don't even bother voting due to the fact that their vote will not contribute to their favored candidate's election. This happens often when a democratic voter lives in a republican state, and vice versa (source 3)
Many people stand by the Electoral College as the best course of action. They argue that the certainty of the winner is better, a candidate can't win the election due to regional favor, and this system unsures that there will still be a clear winner even when each candidate recieves the same percentage of votes.
We began using the Electoral College in order to ensure that states with low populations weren't ignored by presidential campaigns. However, it fails to do just that. Presidential candidates focus their attention to swing states, in order to win their electoral votes. Candidates have little to no need to campaign in states that have a majority of one party, because their vote is either a lost cause or all but garunteed. If this system does not do the job that it was originally intended for, then why do we continue to use it?
In conclusion, the electoral college is ineffective and outdated. we should no longer use this as a system of defining our president. Even though a winner is often more clear, there is still a possibility of a tie between candidates. People who support the Electoral College also argue that its a good thing due to swing states having more attention payed to them and therefore being more careful in their decision. However, this reasoning is flawed in that it assumes that citizens of a state are more likely to inform theirselves thouroughly simply because their vote holds more value, in a sense. Also, candidates would no longer pay special attention to swing states if the electoral college weren't in place so the votes of these citizens wouldn't be held above the rest. Increased value of votes is not a good thing, which this argument also assume. It is the best decision to abolish the Electoral College. | 3 |
I am against driverless cars for these supporting reasons. Reason one is the cost. Reason two are the complications with laws. The third reason is the reliableness of driverless cars. My last reason im against driverless cars is the insurance problems.
My first reason why im against driverless cars has to do with cost. The cost to make a driverless car would be insane. These cars will most likely be inflated entirely too much. The amount of money it would take to make streets and highways acceptable for these cars would cost alot of money. It would be pointless to invest in something that only so many people would have.
Another reason im against driverless cars are the laws that would have to change. If driverless cars became everyday things why would people need a driver license? Along with that it would be hard to determine what qualifications you would need to operate one of these. A big issue I see with driverless cars is whos to blame if there is an accident? This idea leads into my next reason
Everyone needs insurance to be on the road legally. This next reason is the conflict that would be surrounded accidents and whos to blame if there is one. In the passage it metions who would you blame if there was an accident, the driver or the manufacterur. That is a hard question to answer. How would you get the car replaced if the insurance companies wont agree to insuring a driverless car because of this issue? Alot more troubles to go through and in some cases might lead to people losing thousands of dollars. With all of that being said it translates in to my next point.
The biggest question for most people would be reliability with these driverless cars. If the technology fails in the middle of the road that would be a big problem. What if there is a glitch in the system that makes the car stop operating. To get these cars repaired would be too much of a hassle for mostly anyone. Getting a driverless car while the technology is young is very risky.
In conclusion I feel like my reasonsare important. These cars should not be street legal. Too much can definetly go wrong with driverless cars. People should think twice before buying into the idea of a driverless car. I am against them and I hope my reasons helped make sense of the situation | 3 |
There are so many advantages of limiting car usage. In source one, the Vauban's streets are completely "car-free". This is for the good of not cluttering the streets with so many cars but actually making more space and less cars on the streets. In source one, it says "while there hace been efforts in the past two decades to make cities denser, and better for walking, planners are now taking the cocept to the suburbs." That right there says they have been trying to reduce car usage for a while now and convince citizens that transportation can be better to use. Instead of having over a million cars on the streets or high ways or anywhere, many people can come together and take transportation train or bus to where ever they need to go. It also makes time for walking, which is a very good exercise. Many people have become lazy and take their car to drive to the store thats right there on the corner instead of walking. Many people have taken car usage over the limits and don't realize how it is polluting our air.
Pollution is a big problem in our ecosystem now and days. Many people don't clearly see this and don't take the time to process in how bad its making earth. Pollution has gone up over the years and decades after decades we have tried to stop it. In source two, it says "Paris typically has more smog than other European capitals." Why? Well because of the exaggerated use of cars. They have tried to reduce the usage in order to make their air cleaner and better. They have gotten the idea of limiting car usage by ordering people with even-numbered license plates to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine on Mondays. The same would apply to odd-numbered plates the following day. With this new policy, it has shown better air in the city of Paris by Monday. I believe this is a great forced rule. We need to change our ways and work better in making our air cleaner.
Traffic jams is another downfall of using cars. With so many cars out in the streets it causes the air to have so much smog. Many people have participated in bike riding and walking, but not only is it exercise for your health but it keeps away from people using their cars. With so many people participating this action, not only has it made better air burt also constructed and cropped up new restaurants and shopping districts. They cleared the side walk to make it smoother and cut traffic, as said in source three. This is all in Bogota, Columbia. They said it has made a drastic change in their community with better air and I believe it has made their air better and way reduced smog.
In the United States, President Obama's goal was to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions. This has led to many people participating in this action. A very big amount of Americans are buying fewer cars and driving less and fewer licences as each year goes by as said in source four. To keep this at a going rate each year I believe citizens should work harder to improve more in this situation as in car pooling, bicycle and public transportation.
In conclusion, there are so many advantages in reducing car usage. Better air, better community and healthier citizens. | 4 |
Limiting car usage can only be positive
We don't need them if we all work together
Car pool denser cities alts will be available (public transit)
Cost effective and convenient
Sidewalks > roads
Convenient(s1l6)
Better for us(can still interact without over-driving)[interactive biking/walking | online interaction]
Giving our cars up in this day and age seems impossible; but if everyone can work together, new opportunities will arise that'll outweigh the convenience of having a personal vehicle. We won't need cars if we all work and cooperate with one another. Not only that but it'll become more cost effective and convenient as a whole in the long run. Once all is said and done, limiting car usage can only be positive.
Many questions would arise if this idea was approached, wouldn't we take longer to get places? Isn't it inconvenient and a step-back from personal commuting? The answer would be yes, but for the most part it's the point. Sure you make take longer to get places by car pooling or taking public transit, but if anyone is doing it there'll be no comparison of time with personal commuting, personal commuting will be gone. If no cars were available cities would compensate with free bikes when commuting or public transit. The no-car weekend in Paris allowed free public transit, so in the long-term it'd also be free (Source 2). City planning would be modified to compensate for the increased commuting time; making the long commutes a little easier. If we all work together we won't need cars, and in the end it'd be positive overall.
In a world of reduced personal commuting, the cost of living would improve as well. Money spent on gas or car maintenance would be nonexistent. Instead of using taxes on expensive roads, they'll be used on inexpensive sidewalks, just like in Bogota (Source 3). With the extra cash from no car expenses it'll be easier to purchase luxury items you may want. Cities will be made with convenience in mind, placing key stores in easily accessible areas, similarly to Vauban's store placement (Source 1). This would answer the question of inconvenience, A ten minute drive can become a ten minute bike or walk with strategic placement. In the end, a reduced car usage society would be more cost effective and convenient, a definite positive compared to an automobile society.
Cars are definitely important to many people, but only because the majority have cars. Take everyone's cars away and they wouldn't have a reason to need one. If we all work together we won't need cars, people will help one another and cities would be planned better. In this society you'd have more money to use as you please, instead of using it to survive. Most important of all, the time to take a car someplace rather than any other alternative would be the same; important locations can always relocate for everyone's convenience. A world without cars can only be positive. | 3 |
I'm a scientist at NASA and I know that the face is just a natural landform. I have plenty of reasons why that is, and why it wouldn't be an alien. Yes, the face on Mars has become a pop icon, but that doesn't mean people could just assume it's an alien. NASA has plenty information and data for why it's just a natural landform. I'll explain my thinking as me being a scientist at NASA.
My first reason is that NASA unveiled the image for all to see. The picture noted a huge rock formation which seemed to be a human head that had eyes, nose, and mouth. You just have to think about it, those characteristics are obvious. I mean yes, it was found in Mars, but that doesn't mean it couldn't have been a human. People just have to think more into the possible and not the impossible, because everything is possible.
My second reason is that they photographed the face. Other scientists at NASA saw that it clearly looked like a human head. My third reason is that they even snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos! When the image first appeared on a JPL web site, it clearly revealed a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all.
This is why I, as a scientist at NASA think it's a natural landform and not an alien . these three reasons I have should make people think about it again and decide it's officially a human head. Those who believe it's an alien, should believe more in miracles. Anything could happen in Mars or any other place around the planet. This is only my opinion, but it sure makes me feel like I'm right about my thinking. | 2 |
There is NO way the "Face on Mars"
was created by alieans. There is definte information that proves anyone wrong that thinks is was created by aliens. First it was proven is was just shadows. Second in 2001 we took a picture in extremely high reslution that shows that is just a mound. Finally if it were created by aliens we would have a man on Mars by now.
The article states in the end of paragraph 2 that is it fake. it says, "Scientists figured it was just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia, only this one had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharoah" This is coming from the leading scientists in the field of space, and that is a small field in witch only a select few get to be in. Just that alone is engouh to prove any conspiracy theory wrong!
In 2001 the Mars Global Surveyor took a picture in its highest resolution, each pixel was only 1.56 meters wide as opposed to the 43 meters of the Viking photos. what the picture actually showed was a Martian mesa, a landform similer to the ones found in the American southwest. The face as it turns out is only just a mesa, and that is nothing special.
Finally if it were created by aliens don't you think we would be there. The funding that would poor in would be more than enough to put a man or woman on mars. Since it is just a rock formation not created by aliens we have ablsoutely no motive to go there, none at all.
There is NO way the "Face on Mars"
was created by alieans. First it was proven is was just shadows. Second in 2001 we took a picture in extremely high reslution that shows that is just a mound. Finally if it were created by aliens we would have a man on Mars by now. | 3 |
I am for the driverless cars. The only reason that I say that is because I think we would have a lot less car accidents and we could be way safer on the road. One detail that I have is there are laser beams to form a constant 3-D model update
of the car's surroundings. what's the point of the 3-D system is for the diverless car to mimic a diver at the wheel and to see where the cars are located around the car. Also, another reason that i'm with this diverless car is because at any time you can use the sensors to controll the car at any time.
Also, another reason that I like the idea of self-driving cars is they can sterr, accelerate, and brake themsleves. But all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents. The necessitates the car being ready to alert car being ready to quickly get the drivers attention whenever a promblem occurs. When the driver needs to be alerted there are more than one way to alert the driver instead of just giving an announcement to the driver. This is my opinion on self driving cars and why i would be for this tyoe of technolgy. | 1 |
The "Unmasking the Face on Mars" can be believed as being a natural landmark or created by aliens. There are many thoughts to as it being natural or aliens creating the face. Everytime scientists go to Mars they normally see the face. So who knows if it was actually created naturally or by aliens. It is your opinion as to how the Face on Mars was created.
When scientist go to Mars they scan over it in "2.5 km-wide strips," and they hardly every pass over the face. The face has had unusual shawdows when they examine it. Sometimes the face "has given an illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." Have you ever thought of the face coming from nobody realizing it when they walk they may kick the dust and it could have formed and it may not be that windy, so it nevers moves. The face could represent that there could be life on Mars.
There are many thoughts as to how the face happened. Also "few scientists believe that it is an alien artifact." Not every scientist has to believe the same thing as another scientist. The face is most likely naturally there because there are many things in the universe that are naturally made. Many mountains, hills, cracks, and special marks on things are usually natural, which is why many people believe the Face on Mars is naturally there. | 1 |
You should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program. The program will allow you to experience many different adventures and go to many unique and eccentric places. One time my friend, Don Reist, and I went to New Orleans after the Pacific War had ended. We boarded the SS Charles W. Wooster, and we headed to Greece with the cargo of 335 horses with enough oats and hay to feed them. That was my first order, and I had fun.
The cattle-boat trips were an unbelievable opportunity for a small-town boy, such as myself. Besides getting to help others, I had the side benefit of getting to see Europe and China. When I first went to Greece, I saw the Acropolis. I had also toured an excavated castle in Crete, and I marveled at the Panama Canal on my way to China. See, there are many adventures you can take on side of joining the Seagoing Cowboys program.
One time when I was going to China, it took about two weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United States and a month to get to China. Caring for the animals during the crossings always kept me busy. The animals had to be fed and watered two or three times a day. Stalls had to be cleaned. Luckily for me, helping my aunt Katie out on her farm as a boy had prepared me for hard work, just not for the dangers of the sea. As another example, if you had the experience I did of helping on the farm you have been slightly prepared with hard work.
One dark rainy night, after making my hourly report to the captain, I slid down a slippery ladder on my backside. My heart raced as I shot my feet torward an opening on side of the ship. The only thing keeping me from falling overboard into the deep, dark, and dangerous Atlantic Ocean was a small strip of metal along the edge. I was really happy to still be alive. But, I couldn't work for a couple of days because of some cracked ribs. I'll admit it, there some dangers working as a Seagoing Cowboy. But, the people there really look after you, and they care about you.
Being a Seagoing Cowboy was much more than an adventure for me. Participating in the program opened up a whole new world for me. I am really grateful for the opportunity. The program helped make me more aware of people of other countries and their needs. That awareness stayed with me, leading my family to host a number of international students and exchange visitors for many years. | 3 |
The article is called The challenge of Exploring Venus. The author makes a explaination of how scientists will be able to find a way and travel to venus and adapt our lifes there and being able to live there with no danger and making it possible with technology.
Scientist want to find a way to get to Venus and they are thinking of ideas of making a space ship and having the astronauts fly there and trying them to adapt there lifes there. They are already studying and learning more about venus but they also want to have enough research so that they can be safe enough to know that it okay being there. Also, the atmospheric pressure in Venus is 90 times greater than what the human handle in earth. The temperature in Venus is going to toasty and around 170 degrees fahrenheit. Scientist talked about how astronomers are vasinated with traveling to Venus. Life on Venus would be as close as earth and can be the same to earth because Venus has mountains and valleys and craters. The technology in earth is really getting better but in venus the technology wouldn't handle the heat of venus because its to strong. But they are working so hard and facing the challenges that are coming against them. They talk about how modern computers are more delicate and could be more dangers to the conditions in venus. They are also having to face danger because its more heat and a high temperature for there body.
With scientists learning and pushing themselves to understand more about venus it helps to hopefully have a chance to one day to visit venus and adopt there lifes there and improve there technology. Only time and hard work of research would maybe help scientist visit venus. | 1 |
Dear State Senator, it is more favorable to keep the splendid method of the Electoral College and not to change it to election by popular vote for the United States President. The Electoral College method is more perferable because it helps to advoid run-off elections, and less numerical values.
Using the Electoral College to vote is more efficent because of it's aid to advoid run-off elections. As Richard A. Posner states," The Electoral College advoids the problem of elections in which no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast." It also can help candidates running for president to advoid going to states that they know whose vote will have no effect. For example, Democrats in Texas and Republicans in California or how Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had only a 43% plurality of the popular votes while winning a majority in the electoral college. There isn't even any pressure for run-off elections when no candidate wins a majority vote that was cast leading to a clear winner.
Furthermore, using the Electoral College to select the President can help to reduce numerical values. Even though a citizen's vote doesn't automatically go to the candidate running for office and actually selects the electors that will select the President, the amount of votes it reduced greatly. The Electoral College consists of 538 electors, rather than a estimate of 500 million votes total. Only a majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect a President. This includes one for each member in the House of Representatives and two for Senators. With most states having a winner-take-all system it even more so reduces the numerical value to that of just electors to vote for the winning presidential candidate while voters in toss-up states are more likely to pay closer attention to the campaign. Those voterss are more likely to be more thoughtful on average. They also receive the most information and attention from candidates.
Although, some articles and people consider the Electoral College method to be unfair to voters. Bradford Plumer says,"Because of the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning." Even so, knowing their vote will have no effect, they will have kess incentive to pay attention to the campaign than they would if the president were to be picked by popular vote.
Continuing, as was said before to the State Senator, it's a much more favorable idea to forward with the Electoral College method rather than popular vote because it will help advoid many time-consuming problems like run-off elections and high numerical values. | 3 |
The author supports the claim very well by incdicating the ways we could battle the cilmate and the other problems such as the ground conditions and the pressure. He or She defends how they feel about it using good information and explains it to the best of their ability.
Venus is a hard planet to view or study because of the heat and the autosphere around it. It would take a lot of planning and work to go to vist and study Venus for a certain amount of time. Luckly this author shows great ways and good reasons to why we should take the chance and plan towards the idea to at least study Venus. The author does list the reasons why it is really hard to visit but he or she does a good way by doing that to list the reasons as to how we could beat them all as so here.
The ways we can survive and reasons to why we should go to venus are a given, it is quite known to be the most Earth-like planet in the solar system. It has valleys, mountains, and craters. Yes the hot temp and the hostle conditions on the surface keeps us from touching down on venus there are many ways to beat that. The author says NASA could make a "blimp-like vechicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roliing Venusian landscape" thats a good way to deal with the landscape problem. "Solar power would be plentiful and radiation would not exceed earth levels." For the hot tempatures that venus has the solar power would be able to power some sort of AC unit in the blimp. NASA has also made machanical parts for machines and ships that can be heat resistant and pressure resistant for the trip to Venus.
In conclusion to the trip and how hard it would be to make all these requirements. Making it to venus is something we must plan hard to do. Studying Venus might give us information we might have never knew. We could possibly find ways to actually get a man down there even through the hot tempature and harsh conditions. One day we will finally get to Venus and then study and work on finding new features and information. This is why we need to take the risks and try for a trip to Venus. | 3 |
After reading the article "Unmasked the Face of Mars" I believe that these are just natural formed lanforms. One reason is because this face has many similar characteristics to landforms found in the west. Secondly, because the the pciture only show a natural land form after all. Lastly becuase because we have no affical proof that this was once a alien civilization.
One reason I believe that this is simply a natrual landform because of the many simularities it has with many of the landfroms in the west. In paragraph (12) it states that "What the picture actually show is the Martian equivalnt of a butte or mesa land forms common arounf the American west. Also it states in the same paragraph that " Thats a lava dome that takes the form of a isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on mars."
Another reason that this text has caused me to belive that all the face is , is natural landform because when many people obeserved tha photo many belived that is was a natrual landform after all. In paragraph (7) " Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting for when the image first appeared on JPLweb sie revealing ....... a natural lanform. There was no signifigance of an alien mounument after all. Also earlier in the article in paragrph (2) it state that "Sientists figured it was another martian mesa, common enough around Cyndonia. Only this one had unusal shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharoh.
The third and finale reason why I believe that this is just a natural land form is beause NASA has simply no proof that this could possibly that there could have been once a alien civilization one Mars (Cydonia). In paragraph ( 2 ) "Scientists figured out that is was only a common martian mesa, it was only the unusal shadow to make it look like a Egyptian Pharoh. Also on paragraphs (10) though(12) it states that the weather was clear and all they had found was that they had no signifagance to proof of an alien civilization on mars only to have simular characteristics of natural landforms quiet like the ones on earth.
On the other hand maybe its not a natural landform maybe some people may be right it could be some type of alien landform.
NASA could have done somthing to the pictures to mess with the hopefulls. In paragraph (8) states that " The camera on board the MGS had to peer through the whispy coulds to see that face. Perhaps, siad skeptics , alien markings were hidden by haze. But this has no relevance because on there clear weather second attempt of getting a photo , they figured out i was just a natural landform becuase of the fact that in this photo it clearly dipicked that it had many of the same characteristics of natural landforms in the American west. This proves even though that that could have been a civilization it shows that it was only a landform.
In conclusion, all the Face of Mars is a natural landform because they didnt have any proof that this was an alien civilization. It had many of the same characteristics of many natural landforms in the American West and that it much of the research they had still proved that it was a natural landfrom because of there findings. | 4 |
It is important to know how a student is feeling. So, Yes the use of FACS (Facial Action Coding System) in a classroom is valuable.
Facial Action Coding System allows us to weigh different units to identify mixed emotions. Its a simple process that allows us to classify six basic emotions; happiness,surprise,anger,disgust,fear,and sadness. Those emotions are associated with characteristic movements of the facial muscles. The text states "The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D model of the face ; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles."This is called an "action unit". Individuals often show varying degrees of expression, using FACS the new emotion recognition tracks these facial movements .
In conclusion, the Facial Action Coding System is esential because it can detect how other people are feeling, even when hiding their emotions. The system can recognize the subtle facial movements and mixed emotions. With this system we can get a better understanding of students and more. | 1 |
Life without cars would be different, would it not? Well that's what the small town of Vauban, Germany is doing. They are doing it in an effort to reduce greenhouse gases. they are also try to get other towns/cities around the world to participate in this "car-free" movement. Here are some ways limited car usage effects the world.
It reduces greenhouse gases. 12 percent of greenhouse gases come from Europe and about 50 percent come from the United States in the car intensive areas that is. if we were to start having limited car usage we could drastically decrease the car emission greenhouse gases by about 50 percent. Paris, France has a partial ban on cars and only lets certain cars drive on certain days which completely cleared out the smog that had been covering the city for a while.
It increases the amount of money the usual gas consumer has. the save a ton of money from not having to refill on gas all of the time. Thus, causing more money to be spent and having the economy increase. It can also cause for the city to start fixing sidewalks instead of roads because not as many people would use the roads as much.
People in the U.S., Europe, and South America are already taking steps to have a cleaner environment. new sidewalks, new laws/bans, and just the gneral public are helping. Will you be one of the people that helps? | 1 |
Cars. Everyday the average citizen uses a car to get around wether it be for groceries or just going to their job. It has gotten to the point that many people cannot imagine the idea of living without a car. For those few people who have made the switch to not using a car daily however, have experienced some good things about life without a car. In the passage set it explores the different positive side effects that can come along with not having a car from real life situations. There are many different things that can happen with just this one change and some of these examples you might not have thought about before.
The first two sources talk mostly about the environmental changes that having no cars could bring. Source one focuses on the greenhouse gasses that are produced from car usage. The article states "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe . . . and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States." This is a huge deal because greenhouse gasses are belived to be responsible for global warming which could become a huge threat. Source two continues to bring up the air pollution problems that are ocurring in places around the world. Air pollution can cause a variety of problems from people having problems breathing to plants dieing. The problem has gotten so bad that "Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city". The problem of smog has gotten so serious that a whole community had to ban driving which is insane that it's gotten that far. Limiting car usage could take car of our Earth the way it takes care of us.
The last two sources, sources 3 and 4, look at the way that limiting car ussage could improve our communites. Source three talks about how that cutting back on car ussage could benifit different parts of our surroundings. Near the end of the passage it says "Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city". It then continues to list off individual things like rush hour traffic being cut down and sidewalks that were in poor condition are perfect again. The last source talks about the economic benifits that having less cars operating could bring. As a result of the recession people were forced to get creative on how to save money in order to get by. One thing we did was cut back on the amount of gasoline we used which in turn led to us cutting back on the amount of driving we did. This boosted our economy and there in no reason why it can't continue to boost our economy even further if we cut back our car usage even further.
In conclusion cutting back on how much we use our cars has many advantages that will benifit every person living today. There are even more advantages that were not mentioned in the sources above that will improve the world even more. Along with there being a ton of advantages, there are little to no disadvantages. Think to yourself of at least four advantages of increasing the amount of car usage. How many could you think of? | 3 |
Street parking and garages have been forbidden for a while. only way you would have a garage was if you purchased one with your home. there were only two places you could park at and thats really only for two cars.
Paris banned people from driving there cars , up to 4,000 people were fined , so most of everybody car was impounded. to me there losing money because the amount of people that buy gas for there cars if you think about it thats a big lost how many people in paris drive cars theres going to be a big percentage of the money gone due to this car ending madness. some deleivery places couldnt even have cars so its messing up their money too.
Car Free Day I find strange because no one can drive . its too many people in the world everyone if not going to fit on the busses they have , due to this tragic people have to now walk where they have to go. If you dont have a bike or skateboard then your out of luck so since this happened no one really got where they needed to be. I think even people had to miss work for this , also the kids . how would they get to school ? to me banning cars would be the dumbest idea anyone ever made up. this world would come to a end without cars.
In America people in driving population goes up by the hour , like when you travel you go more miles than you think you do. most people in America have stopped driving and start travling by bus. with all these changes, people who stopped car commuting as a result they may find less reason to resume the habit. | 0 |
Think of a clear world, no smog, no pollution, just a beautiful day everyday. Now wouldn't that be nice. What if I told you that you can make it happen? It's as easy as snapping your fingers. This thing you have to do is, drum roll please..... not using your car. I know it sounds crazy right now but let me tell you about all the good that comes out of it, and maybe, just maybe you'll change your mind.
Now as most of you know there is alot of pollution all over Earth, and this pollution is caused by alot of things, but the two main reasons are cars and power plants. Pollution caused by cars affects alot of things including greenhouses. When smoke from a car reaches a greenhouse it produces a gas that negativly affects the enviroment. Your probably thinking that it's no big deal because "theres not alot of greenhouses", but that's where your wrong. As Elisabeth Rosaenthal says " Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States".
Another thing that is caused by cars is smog. Robert Duffer, the writer of
Paris bans driving due to smog , wrote that " Paris typically has more smog than other European capital ...[Last] week Paris had 147 micrograms of particulate matter (PM) per cubic meter compared with 114 in Brussels and 79.7 in London, Reuters found". Congestion in France was down 60 percent after almost a week of intensifying smog. They had to stop using cars of course, but it was the only way to get the smog to go down.
Now that we've talked about the bad stuff caused by cars, let's talk about the good that can come out of not using a car as much or not at all. alot of people who participate in not using a car, weather it was for a day or for forever, have said that it reduces alot of stress and air pollution. Lower air pollution makes for more clean and clear air. Which means you get to see the day better than before, and who wouldn't want that. Overall it not only helps you, but it also helps the planet you live on, so give walking a try, you might even find seeing nature around you better than driving by it. | 2 |
Hello, I am writing to you about the Electoral College and why that I think it should be removed. Why I think we should remove the Electoral College is when voter selects the president they want they are really just picking for a elector who elects the president for them. Also this makes a single rep from Wyoming of 500,00 people has as much say as 55 reps for California who represents 35 million people. The last reason behind this is also being unfair to voters, the winner take all system where in the state the winner of the votes gets them all. So in effect a candidate would spend no time in that per say a swing state. which the may have a chance of winning.
When you vote for the president you really are not voting for him, you're voting for a elector who really elect the president. Also the question is brought up, who picks the electors? This also depends on the state could be the state party's central committee or the presidential candidate's people do. Also another question is what controls the elector from electing the wrong candidate, nothing.
Also why does a single reps in Wyoming with 500,00 people have as much say as 55 reps in California with 35 million people? That is just unfair to the voters, how could that in anyway represent what the majority of the people want. The other way the electoral collage is unfair is the winner take all system I mentioned earlier with majority votes in a state is the state vote, such as if 46 percent of people in a state voted one candidate and 54 for the other insted of just giving the candidates their votes the majority decided one would have them.
The Electoral College is also not a democratic system of voting because the people are really not deciding, and when it is said you are allowing each party to pick a trusted slate of nominees it is not true because the state's central committee not the presidential candidate's reps who are the people really needed to vote for such. In 2000 Gore had more popular votes than bush but less electoral votes, though rare to happen this the president who runs the country for four years at a time so that one rare moment could mean the future of the U.S.A . Also a president does not need to be trans-regional, they only need to appeal to swing states and not ruin relations with their states.
So that was and is my reasoning of why I think that the Electoral College should be removed from our political system. Between the being unfair to voters through voting for electors not even the president, reps not even being scaled right also the winner take all system making the system unbalanced, and the presidential candidates not even needing to appeal to most states just the swing states. I hope this passage convinces you that the Electoral College should be removed in place of a better system that is not out dated. | 3 |
I believe that the use of technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is sort of valuable. It can either help someone or not. But it doesn't hurt to try.
To begin with,
I say sort off because, for one, you never know what a person is going through. If the computer can tell someones emotion why not see how they're feeling. If they're sad or depressed maybe you can help them in someway. But also, people might not want you to know how they're feeling. So using the computer's app, that is kind of disrespecting them in a way because they dont want you to know their emotions.
Also, I still think it is valuable because like a I said if they're sad you can help them. Even if they don't want you to know, you can still help them secretly though. They will recieve help without even knowing that they're getting help. Little do people know, alotof people who are sad tend to smile the most and just look happy. So, honestly i do feel like it is very valuable, people should use it. But not just anyone, maybe like doctors or specialist.
I think specialists should be the ones to use them because they can be the ones to help people and they actually know how to do so. In the passage it talks about how in some people it is easy to tell by their face expression what they are feeling. But sometimes it is hard, and i agree. That is why I do think it is very valuable to use the computer.
Lastly, I do think its useable. It helps by letting us know who is depressed or stuff like that. But like I had said, I belive it should only be doctors using it and not just anyone because people and kids are immature and we would not want others to make them feel worse. | 2 |
Dear State Senator,
"The American people should consider themselves lucky..." "What is the Electoral College?" by the Office of the Federal Register, "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong" by Bradford Plumer, and "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our depised method of choosing the President" by Richard A. Posher, these 3 passages were compared about electoral votes. Which one to for the people would choose, either in favor of keeping the Electoral College or changing to election by popular votes for the U.S. president? Answer: You should be able to keep the Electoral College so every person has their right in voting and it would be equal equal.
Whether the people don't care about who's gonna get it or not going to, it would still be better off voting and trying to get that person elected. "..the electoral college is unfair to voters." All the people want is to be equal and have their rights and in order for them to have rights. Instead, of Congress going with just the populars, they should be able to count up all the people's voting choices and let it decide like that. "The election is only a few swing voters away from catastrophe." If the higher people in the Presidency don't take charge soon enough every electoral poll booth we have will turn into a big mess with horrible, unexpected things coming.
If all things were possible, do you really think this world would be having these arguments or 'hard choices'. "A tie in the nationwide electoral vote is possible because the total number of votes is an even number." Does that mean we should go with the popular votes if it's a tie? Yes, well if it's an even number it happens rarely enough where you don't see it often. "Voters are the people who want to express rather than people who think a single vote will decide." The people eho think one vote will decide more than the other's is wrong because what if that person had expressed their vote and the other choice would've won.
"The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational." Not everything you do will be fair in life. Other words, yes give your opinion and hope that you'll be heard and it will help. | 0 |
In addition to, the story people think that the Face was created by aliens. In this essay i will be talking about, Whether or not people have proof or evidence that the Face was created by aliens?, What would make people think that the Face was created by aliens?, and How do you think this if you just found out about the Face?.
With that being said, Do you think these people that thought the Face was created by aliens have proof or any type of evidence?... I don't think they had proof or any type of evidence because it was on Mars people csn not go around assuming that it was created by aliens if they have no proof. People would have to go to Mars and see for theirselves. Just because it was founded on Mars doesn't neccesarly means that it was created by aliens.
Next, What makes people think that the Face was created by aliens?. Is it because they knew that it came from Mars?... I strongly believe it is because all these people knew that it came from Mars, i'll tell you why i think this. I think this because it appeared in books, magazines, radio talk shows, and even haunted grocery stores as stated in paragraph 5. So, because it appeared in so many places people started to make assumtions, and really believed that the Face was created and made by aliens.
Futhermore, How does people think this if they just recently found out about the Face?. Well, people think this just because it it was the most popular story or myth going on at the time and since it came from Mars that it was created by aliens because they know people doesn't live on Mars.. But, that doesn't mean human beings do not visit to see what it is like in person.
In my opinion, last but not least, people should not make any assumtions before they don't know the full story or the truth behind it all and to ask people who was it created it by and stop always thinking they know everything and making a lot of assuming statements, to where it makes a huge rumor around the world. | 3 |
Driverless cars. A helpful thing for our future, or the destruction of it? Google, the BMW, and more have been trying to create affective driverless cars for everyone to help shape our future for the better. It's been debated for a while, especially with accidents and saftey but in the end it's really just about what's best for us all.
Though not all of the fifty states in America agree with it, Google and other companies have been trying to create and improve our future with something useful; Driverless cars. They've created a car that can steer, break and accelerate on it's own therfore, virtually calling it driverless but, the assistance of a human is still very much needed. In order to make the idea more fun and appealing they've placed entertainment technologies into the cars, which can be very useful at times, but the most important and useful thing about these new cars is their saftey.
Thousands of people all around the world get into automobile accidents everyday. But what if over half, if not more, of all those accidents could be avoided? When it comes to driving, safety is the most important thing there is. With the new driverless cars, that's no longer a big problem. With it's abbility to sense and see everything arround you, it's able to break or accelerate if needed and they have warnings that they give you to help keep you from hurting yourself or inncocent pedestrians and when it's your turn at the wheel it signals you to do so with a special feature, some cars' different than others.
Although it's not completely driverless yet, they're slowly progressing towards that bright future. Just imagine a day where you can wake up and almost never have to worry about anyone getting in a crash again. This eveloution is bringing forth a saffer and more prosperous future for all of us and not all states agree with these terms but i'm sure they will. We all have the same goal, wanting a safer enviornment for us to live in. Their evolving creation of driverless cars is slowly, but surely, helping us get there. | 2 |
In my opinion, I think driverless cars would be a great idea for our future. Driverless cars have many postive things about them for example, they use less gas than cars today. People would love to save money. Lets say a person had to babysit until midnight and then that person has to wake up early in the morning to go to work. Well, that person with a driverless car would't have to worry about driving or perhaps having an accident. The car could be driving by itself and the passenger(s) could be on their phones or doing any other activity. Of course, someone should pay attention and make sure there is no roadwork or accidents. Many items have already been improved so making a big change like this could make everything different. The companies who make these cars (Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan) will also make lots of money because I'm sure that many people will want to own a driverless car of their own. To all the people out there that don't know how to drive, these driverless cars could make their lives easier. Today's technology is very advanced so there wouldn't really be any problems with the cars. We have everything we need and maybe even the government would use driverless cars. Imagine ambulances, police cars, fire-trucks, and taxi's being availble for the community! Driverless cars could be used all over the world and they could make our lives better. These cars even give signals when someone should take over the wheel. For example, the seat might vibrate or just announce it. This would be a new way to drive and it would be much more entertaining. Driverless cars shouldn't be illegal or banned. There is nothing wrong or bad about them. People should just be responsible and everything will be okay. Since 2009 cars like this have been developed and now its 2016, so the chances are that these cars could be even better and safer. Our future is supposed to be better and that's why I think that driverless cars should be created and sold. | 2 |
I am against driverless cars , because they are not completely drive less. What the point of buying a driveless car when you still have to control the car in times. I am against them because when i hear these cars are driveless im thinking i could be texting or doing homework on the way to school. Then they say these cars dont exactly drive by them selfs so what the point of having a smart car?
Imagine all the new laws we would have to make. If these cars drive by themselfs and they crash whos fault is it? Whos really to blame for the car crashing the owner? Or the company? This would cause a big argument and take a lot of time to make new rules and laws. For example would we need a driver license, or whats the age limit to be in a smart car?
Another thing is this would probably cost a lot of money. How are the cars suppose to stop at the stop light ? Im thinking they would change all the stop lights to put a type of computer or sensor that the car can connect to. Just by doing that saying the car wouldnt have any more things we would have to upgarde it would cost a lot of money. Who will pay for these upgrades ? The car company or are they going to take it out of our taxes and make us pay? If that was the thing its just another reason why i dont agree with smart cars what if i dont have one and they are making me pay for all these things.
I pesonally dont think that smart cars are a good idea. For some of the reasons i stated and for many more. | 2 |
Dear,Senator
I think we should in take concideration in the next few years about changing are election to popular vote. I feel that are state would benefit in a positive way with the way that popular vote is set up. looking at the past history the electoral college is not benefiting us in a positive direction. i qutoe this from the article "over 60 percent of voters would pefer a direct election"with that being said lets look at the cons of the electoral college.
To begin with the electoral college system the people like me dont get to vote for president i have to vote for someone else to vote for me in that i feel like my vote doesnt count because what happens if i vote for a elector and he doesnt go for my person to win. That just makes me feel dumb then if the elector does vote for the same person asme its not really even final becuase that vote doesnt go towards the president it goes toward the state elector and its basically there choice. another con in the electoral college system is that the same fiasco in 2000 will break out again. were the legislatures are responsible for picking electors and they dont take in to concideration of other people votes. the con that could mostly impact america is a tie in the electoral vote. another reason the electoral college is an stupid way to vote is that the big states get better privelges than the smaller states they out rule the smaller states. Its final the electoral college is unfair outdatedand irrational.
the only reasons the electoral college is alive now is the cetainty outcome,everystates president,swing states,runoff elections .run off electionsn means basically there will never be a blow out in the voting polls it will always be compitive with that being said with the presidents trying to run for president the will actually try to reach the peoples needs to meet there satisfactory. the swing states is sayiong that there one state isnt going to decide the whole election. | 2 |
Accourding to the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" it says that even though it's "driverless" its not completely driverless. So what is even the point of having a so called "driverless" car if its not completely driverless. I would think if someone was going to go spend money on what I assuming to be is a very expensive car, that they bought for it specific reason so they do not have to drive for any cicumstances.
If Google were to start selling these so called "driverless" cars, and something were to happen would it be the person in the car's fault or the cars? Honestly I feel like this would be a huge conflict if they were to become public. For example if someone got into an accident would it be there fault not paying attention in the "driverless" car. If Google is going to say they have a "driverless" car I think they should make it completely driverless, so itcould be worth your money and prevent accidents.
"They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead accuires human skill, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents." That is the part that is scary about these cars would if it has a malfunction and doesn"t notify the driver? Would if the car is a reason for one of those accidents? How long will they work until they give up and just stop working? What happens if they stop working and the driver has no control over the car? See there are so many possiblilities that makes these cars so unsafe.
Cars opperated by us are unsafe now as it is, imagine something without a brain driving a car. Why do we need "driverless" cars around? From what I have experinced while driving, it teaches you responsiblitly, and it teaches you to be aware of your surroundings. If you make a car that you don"t have to drive then doesn't that just defet the whole purpose of driving? Without human opperation on cars we would have people in this world who would rely on everthing else on this Earth to do things for them.
We dont need computer opperated cars to drive for us when we can just do the work ourselves. Like I said before it teaches us responsiblitly, and without responsiblitly what would this world become? We would become duds. I understand that a manual driven car is technology, but it provides us disipline, and self awareness. Do you think that a "driveless" car could provide that for us? Provide anything for us other than laziness? Driverless cars would be the end of humanity and we would become robots living in a world of technology. | 2 |
Alright, so this facial emotional technology that's supposed to know your emotion based on your facial expressions is wack. The articles says something about how being able to read student's emotions in class is valuable.
The article states that the computer will read a students emotion and modify the lesson if they seem bored or confused. Okay so if the student is confused there needs to be a more simple way to put the lesson. How will the computer decide wich way is more simple. what if its more simple way is actually more confusing. Or lets say the student is bored, we have the same problem. There isnt much a computer can do to make it more fun. I mean can you even make it more fun besides just wording it differently? It isnt an effective way to do it and even harder for a computer to do so. Its far easier for a human instructor to word the lesson differently than a computer because the computer lacks the real connection that a person can have with you.
Then theres is chance that the students emotion isnt even related to the lesson, but may be from the outside. Maybe they got mad at someone, a loved one died, a breakup maybe, or even thiers parents got divoreced. Not only would it be hard for a computer to determine the emotion is caused by an outside force but even to figure a way to help. The technology may even be wasted on helping students when there could be better use for it.
The article doesnt give you much evidence as to wether this would help besides saying it will modify the lesson. How, in what way?
Not only would it be difficult to do this, but would it even be effective? So maybe it is a little effective and the computer can put some things on screen to make you happy, but if it isnt that effective then there is no good uses for it and no one will use it. If you are creating something that can add value or help people in some way, it cant just be barely effective or even just a little. The cost of making this, testing it, and everything else going into the program, and for it to just kind of work is not an effective way to help people or even get them to consider to use it because it will just waste their time more than anything.
At the end of the day we humans have too complex emotions to create something to not only recongnize our emotions (which is the easier part), but to help us when feeling negative emotions. | 3 |
I honestly dont think driverless cars are a good idea. Yes, there are benifits to driverless cars but I personally think there are more disadvantages than advantages. I my self personally like the fact that the driver does not have to drive the car all the time. I think it would be a good idea for handicapped people.
I do not think it is a good idea for many reasons. It states in the article that the cars are eqqipted with a gps, but what if there is a current construction or hazard in the route it takes you? How will the car beable to pass another car on a two lane highway? How about drunk drivers? If a drunk wants to get in a car and drive, that car would allow it, but whenever it is time for the driver to take over, 99.9% of the time that will not happen.
I think there will always be manuel driven cars and trucks around. If someine needs to tow something a driverless car would not be able to tow anything. Farmers, personal buissness' and many other people would have a big issue with this.
Although the world is nearly going to all electronics, mechanics will have to go back to school to learn about these new cars. Most manuel driven cars never have peoblems on the road, because everything is mechanical. Switching everything over to an electronic sensor will mess everyone up. If a laser goes out for surroundings around the car, the driver cannot do anything to help it.
Driverless cars is a bad idea. Drunk drivers will be a huge hazard. Along with many other road hazards. I think it is a good idea for handicapped people, and disabled people. | 2 |
I think that schools should use this techonlogy to tell when a student is going through a tough day. If schools had that technology schools would be a lot safer and we wouoldnt have to worry about
violence on school property. In the story it state that “A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,” Dr. Huang predicts. Can you imagine how sage schools would be if they were able to detect how a student how has his head down with his hood up or the kid that doesn't speak??
With this software cops could see if a suspect is lying or not by just decoding their expression. The author states that
“The facial expressions for each emotion are universal,” observes Dr. Huang, “even though individuals often show varying degrees of expression” I mean of course it would be to decode a actor or actress's moods since they get paid to use various of mood.
Now with this oftware you detect if your girlfriend is angery,upset,disgusted, fearful or happy without getting on her nerves by asking . When I first read the article is against it because that's kind of personal but theen I began thinking about how helpful ad useful this could be to put an end to school shootings.Now if we have this technology we could detect who isn't happy and could make sure they get to feeling better and make sure nothing happens the could be detremental to society even for the kids 12-21 .
Lastly, this technology could improve the crime rate a lot more by being able to have access to this techology police departments can find out if a victim or suspect is lying.
In conclussion I would like to see to see the Facial Action Coding System in schools and within the use of police deparmnets across the nation. Farther more with this technology in schools i hope to see the number of school violence decrease with the use of this software. | 2 |
In order to dramatically reduce greenhouse gases, a new fad is being introduced all over the world. The fad is ways to make the world more "car-free" or "car-reduced". This may sound shocking and to complicated to implement, but believe it or not, there are communites and cities that are already showing improventment with decresasing greenhouse gases that cars let off.
Vauban, Germany, is an upscale, fully functional expirimental German suburb on the outskirts of Freiburg, without cars. Street parking, driveways and home garages are not found in Vauban, the main form of transportation is a public tram that runs to downtown Freiburg. Heidrun Walter is a media trainer who lives in Vauban with her two kids, Mrs. Walter states, " I am much happier this way". Completed in 2006, Vauban is a an example of a growing European and United States trend that separates auto useage from suburban life. Everything that the 5,500 residents of Vauban could need is walking distance away, the community is built in a rectangular square mile with all of the stores on a main street.
Greenhouse gases from Europe contribute to 12 percent of all emmissions, the United States is responsible for as much as 50 percent of these emmissions. To most people, these numbers would be meaning-less, but to the people of Paris, these number clearly showed with their smog covered streets. Paris hit a near-record pollution rate which caused the partial driving ban to take place. The partical driving ban in Paris was as follows; on Monday, motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to not use their cars, or be forced to pay a fine, on Tuesday, the same instructions were put in place for odd-numbered plates, this ban continued throughout the week. While this did outrage some drivers, public transit was free of charge from Monday through Friday which did help drivers who were restricted.
A national "Day without cars" was Bogota, Columbia's way to incorperate car limitations. Millions of Columbian participants found alternative ways to get to and from work. Bogota has a total of 7 million citizens who were promoted to use alternative transportation and reduce smog. Despite gray clouds and random spurts of rain, Mayor or Bogota, Antanas Mockus said, " The rain hasn't stopped people from participating." For a first time, during the previous national, "Day without cars" two other Columbian cities, Cali and Valledupar joined the event. "These people are generating a revolutionary change, and this is crossing borders," said Enrique Rera, the mayor of Asunción, Paraguay. Along with the "Day without cars," Columbia has also put out rush-hour restrictions, smoothed sidewalks, and cropped new resturants and upscale shopping districts.
All three cities have showed creative and functional ways to cut back on using cars, weather it be offering new ways to have a less complicated life in Vauban, Germany, limiting the number of cars that can drive on certain day in Paris, France, or creating a national holiday which encourages people to find alternative ways of transportation like in Bogoata, Columbia. It is clear that people in places everywhere are ready to make a change to cut down on greenhouse gases. The United States, as a whole has shown cutbacks on the number of vehicles and licenses being issued, in fact the amount of young people driving decreased by 23 percent from 2001 and 2009. Ultimately, the goal for the entire world is to conserve resources, lower emission rates of harmful greenhouse gases and improve safety, with the rate that cities and communities are going now, this goal without a doubt reachable. | 3 |
The Electoral College makes it so that candidates have a just as fair a chance as the other candidates. In the artical
What is the Electoral College , it says that, "The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A mojority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the President"(1). Two hudrend seventy is over half of 538 therefore giving the candiate presidency. "Your state's entitled allotment of the electors equals the number of members in its Congressional delegation: one for each memebr in the House of Representatives plus two for your Senators"(1). This being each state has the same number of senators and one represenative from the House. This seems pretty fair and it lines up with the Electoral College.
While it is true that the Electoral College seems unfair at the most basic level(2), the Electoral College still should not be removed because it keeps the ranks within the elections at peace. Although some may see the Electoral College as unfair, it is just about as fair as popular votes. If the Electoral College were to be abolished then Obama wouldn't have won the Election back in 2012 because the elctions would be based off of popularity and more people were against Obama and wanted a Republican, or Romney. For example,Obama wouldn't have had as fair of a chance as he did in 2008 if the Elcetoral College would have been abolished within the next four years when he ran again. He probably would have lost in 2012 because he didn't win the popular vote and that is what the country would be going by if the were no more Electoral College. This causes people to think that the Electoral College is unfair because Obama won.
This debate is able to go either way because if winning was based on popularity then one candidate would win but the loosing candidates supporters blaim it on the Electoral College, but on the other hand, if Electoral Colleges were banned, then the another candicate would win and the loosing candidates supporters would blame it on elections being based on popularity vote. It is unfair in the loosing team's side so in other words elections are all unfair. For example, "Back in 1960, segregationist in the Louisiana legistlature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratic electors with new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy. (So that a popular vote would have not actually gone to Kennedy.)(2)." This shows that people where desperate for wins and were against popular vote. | 1 |
There's a new comouter software that can recongnize emotions. The software is the latest invention from Prof. Thomas Huang. They call it the Facial Action Coding sytem. It can list off all the emotions by perecentage and claimed to be accurate, but is using this type of technology to read emotional expressions of students in classrooms valuable? I don't think so.
Using a software to read emotional expressions just isn't needed in a classroom. Theres really just no need for it and it would be a waste of money. We can already tell when someone is sad, mad, or happy when you look at there face . There would just be no need to replace that. Us looking at a student is aswell faster then scanning it through some software.
If a classroom would want to use this technology they would need a fast computer and sit the student down to check there emotions. The only reason why we would need that type of software would be to wonder whats wrong with a student but you wouldn't want to sit him down and get scanned in his face. Aswell as the cost of these software programs. Aswell as the cost of faster computers.
I don't think this technology would be useful in any classroom. Not even a classroom computer would be able to run the software in the first place. We would have to write down encodes to figure out 1 students emotions that could change during that moment. Much simpler to just look at a student and see there emotions and how they act and how there treat others to figure out whats going on. | 2 |
In the year of 1976 NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft found a face looking figure staring back at the cameras. A lot of people have conspiracy theories that the aliens caused this. Though, anyone with a decent amount of knowledge in astronomy and even geology, will know that this is simply a mesa of some sort.
With a lot of people and few scientists still believing that the Face was some type of alien creration or artifact, it became a priority for NASA when the MSG arrived to Mars. The MGS was ready to fly over Cydonia to have a better look and get a better picture of the Face. As they were flying over the Face, Michael Malin and his MOC team took a picture ten times sharper than the previous pictures taken by the Viking 1 spacecraft. The pictures were released and all the people eager to see the pictures and everyone from NASA saw that it was nothing but a natural landform.
Though, people and few scientists weren't ready to give up on their opinion. When they looked at the pictures they claimed that the time the picture was taken was a cloudy time. They believed that the clouds affected the quality of the picture. They also said that maybe the alien markings were hidden by the haze.
So NASA reacted to these skeptical claims. On April 8, 2001, On a clear day with no clouds, the MGS was ready for a second investigation of the Face. The MGS rolled 25 degrees to the center of the Face. The picture was amazing using the camera's maximum resolution. The pixels from the image from 2001 spans 1.56, while the viking's best photo had 43 meters per pixel. The picture was so amazing that if there was some objects like landed plains or small shacks you could see what they were.
The Face was an amazing discovery, though some people got carried away thinking it was created by aliens. Though those conspiracy theories were invalid, it doesn't take away the merit from NASA findind this amazing landform on mars and taking high quality pictures. You never know, people might even be able to experience the Face from an even closer look! | 3 |
The face on the plante of Mars was not created by aliens. Scientist have been studying this object for many years and with the new high-tech cameras and the new gear they have they are able to look at the picture very much more clear. The scientist have been studying and have recently just found out that it was just to be a mesa. The mesa is very common in Cydonia as it states in the article. It would make a tlot of sense if it would just be found out that it actually was.
The huge face was studied by Jim Garvin. He traveled to Cydoia to take a look at the face for his self. When he arrived by the huge mesa he took a very good picture to prove it was only a mesa and nothing more. Many people were not happy when they found out what Jim had to say. They were making statements that it was a winter day in that part of "The Red Planet" so it was very cloudy and so he probably just didn't see any of the symbols or signs that the aliens must have made.
The surveyor then went to Mars again in 2001 when it was all summer time by the huge mesa and he then took another photo. " The photo was an extraordinary photo that was taken." says Garvin himself. They eventually found out that it actually wasn't anything that the aliens have made but only a mesa.
Many other people or scientist might say that it is part of alien life because of where it was placed and how it actually looks. People say it is a sign from the aliens or martians. It is impossible for it to be from the aliens because it has been studied for years and years and photos have been taken multiple times to show that it was nothing more than only a mesa.
Aliens don't have the knowledge to know how to make a human face because they have never seen one before. How would an alien or a martian know what a human face looks like. They don't lnow so it couldn't have been from any alien activity
My ruling stands in what in know about the mesa that was found on Mars. People cant argue because it was scientifically proven that it is not a face on the face of the planet it is only a mesa. The mesa on the planet is only a natural landform that happens to look like a face. Nothing more and nothing less. | 3 |
In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author explains why we have yet to travel to Venus and supports with evidence why he thinks we should in the near future. The author supports this idea thoroughly in the presentation of the dangers that traveling to Venus may present, and informing the reader of the advancements in technology and ideas that may allow humans to one day study Venus from up close.
Thoughout the article, the author uses current technology and past human experiences with the planet to portray the difficulties space travellers may have researching the planet. In paragraph three the author explains the harsh environment on Venus that causes spacecraft to malfunction and stop working. The author says, "These conditions are much worse than anything humans encounter on Earth," and that the atmospheric pressure, "...would crush even a submarine," and, "liquefy many metals" (Paragraph 3). These claims support the idea of the planet being challenging to observe with rovers and spacecraft and presents the idea of humans wishing to overcome challenges simply for curiosity's sake.
Additionally, the author explains the progress humans are making in their pursuit of the planet through the creation metals and machinery capable of withstanding the harsh conditions of the hostile Venus. The author presents the idea of a hovering craft on the planet that can escape the severity of the surface; The author stating the conditions were not easy, "...but survivable for humans" (Paragraph 5). The author justly displays this plan by also weighing the negatives. The author states that, "...peering at Venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the surface can only provide limited insight on the ground conditions..." (Paragraph 6) The authro's support of the argument through evidence from both sides shows an understanding of the full scope of the issue and allows the author to affect one's opinion more effectively.
Finally, the author claims that the value in reaching Venus lies in the exploration of human curiosities and the opportunity to learn from an environment so close to home and so unwilling to allow humans to look in. "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" (Paragraph 8). The author believes that the true reward in the exploration of Venus lies in overcoming the challenges we will face along the way and through evidence and reasoning supports the idea that the journey is worth it.
The author of this article supported the idea that the study of our hostile neighbor Venus was worth the risks it presents. The article lays out the dangers and the potential ways of overcoming them, while also presenting the good and bad of the options. Although opinionated, this article presents an idea that is based in sound logic and upon reasonable evidence. The author of this article did an excellent job in explaining and supporting the idea. | 3 |
Driverless cars are a bad idea it is better to stick with smart cars because smart cars are alot more helpful they can help the driver alot more. Driverless cars require massive upgrades to alread existing roads which cost alot of money. Smart cars can help the driver know when he has to be more carefull or when the roads are bad in the area he is driving and he could do what ever it takes to prevent and accident. GM smart cars have vibrating seats to warn the driver when its going to hit and object when its driving in reverse. Smart cars could handle trying up tp 25 mph but the sensors make sure that the driver keeps hand on the wheel. Manufactors are considering putting cameras to see when the driver loses focus on the road. Driverless cars are alot more dangerous because the driver won't have control over the wheel so if anything happens and the driver can get injured he is hoping that nothing wrong goes with the sensors. Driverless cars are a bad idea and smart cars are a better idea because all they have to do is add more things to smart cars and the smart car will be better. | 1 |
Imagine a world where people no longer control their vehicles, the machines they used to buy for the pleasure of driving and not just to get around while playing on their phones. Terrifying right? With the idea of driverless cars coming into view in this modern day and age we must pause from imagining the cool idea of these automated automobiles, and imagine the scary possibilities that very likely could come along too. Many of the people who push for driverless cars only see the idea of a car coming to them withouth them even having to move a muscle. However, these people most likely haven't conscidered the dangers and downfalls of the self driving cars. With these driverless cars comes the possibility that we as a people will become lazy, forget the enjoyment that can come from driving, and most importantly create many new risks and dangers in the driving world.
These days many people are already too lazy to even walk, but imagine if people no longer even have to drive. With automated cars becoming a possibility many are losing their minds over the idea of being able to get around without having to put forth any effort. These people may have learned to drive at one point, but with automated cars they may forget how to drive causing huge problems if they ever need to drive a car that can't drive itself. If we create these self driving cars we will end up with an entirely new breed of lazy people who most likely won't drive their car, let alone walk. The possibility of these lazy folks may be tragic, but is easily moved aside by the fact that self driving cars will take away the enjoyment driving can bring.
Many years ago an idea was fromed that would bring the demise of horseback travel and this idea was the car. Since the day the first car was produced driving has brought many people an immense pleasure that is unrivaled. For years people would save their hard earned cash for the newest car just to feal the power or gentleness it had while they crused the open roads for hours just their car and them. Now that pleasure is being threatened by the idea of self driving cars. With these new cars we will no longer have this pleasure. These self driving cars take away the enjoyment of showing off how nice your car handles or how fast you can drive it as the car does the driving and controls the speed taking away the freedom and pleasure we once had. Although losing the enjoyment of driving is robbery, the dangers of these new cars heavily out weighs our loss of pleasure.
Today's dangers of driving are things such as speeding and lack of awareness; however the dangers of self driving vehicles are much worse. When in a current vehical the dangers of driving are mostly things we can prevent such as rekless driving and lack of attention. With self driving cars they could malfunction leaving no time to correct the vehical meaning an accident or even worse such as death. If a self driving car is having issues the driver may not even be away and seconds later could lose their life. With human controlled cars we have time to correct ourself and most of the time are aware of problems with the vehicle, but not with cars we don't control. These possibilities brought on by self driving cars should be seen before we make the leap to the next generation of travel.
When lazy people, no enjoyment of driving, and new dangers are the risk of self driving cars we should stop and take a moment to think. When I see the risks of these new vehicles I already know that they outweigh the non existant need for self driving cars. These self driving cars bring much more negative than positivie and I disagree with the idea entirely. Take a look at people driving in this day and age and the answer of yes and no for self driving cars is obviously no. | 3 |
You should join the Seagoing Cowboys program because if you like to help people, in this program you will help them by getting supplies for them. If you also like animals, you will care for them and seem them everyday. If you like being on water this is a great program for you. The animals will be on the boat for you to care for them. Also you
will be traveling a lot to get the supplies.
It is also a great way to learn a lot of things. You will learn how to take care of the animals and learn about the places you go to. Taking care of the animals is not the only thing. At night you will take shifts and switch to be a watchman. Every hour you will check on the animals too see if they are okay or to just feed them. Also you will walk around the boat to make sure there isn't anything dangerous out there.
In the meantime if you are just waiting you can have a little fun on the boat. You can play baseball and volleyball with the rest of the people on the boat. Also you can play table tennis tournaments, fenncing, boxing, reading, anad whittling. Then when your done playing, you have to go back to work. You can have a lot of fun just by being on a boat. | 1 |
In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars, for example in the passage they gave a positive things about the driverless cars, and those positive things were the following: they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driverways or dealing with compicated traffic issuses. Some of the negative aspects are through roadwork or accidents. The Positve Meaning there is no problem with the cars that they are now building but there will alwasy be something wrong with a new car people build. By all i mean by this passage that there will be some pros and some cons for the cars. The cars changed every year to make some cars better than others, aslo to persuave the company that the new car is involved.
Before 2000 the tried to make things a little more interesting, but they had missing things so they couldnt make things to work out much. they where missing the following: computre, mapping, radar which is a device on a hilltop That cost a lot of money in the passage is said its about two hundred million dollars. So technaclly you couldnt just buy this at a Radio Shack. Each car is farly different in my opinion, each year they company is gonna continue changeing and making newer cars to make the company increase. Which this is a positive thing about the cars the better tha cars they make the more money they will get.
In 2013 a car name BMW announced the development of "traffic Jam Assitant,"the nre thing about this car was that driving it, it functions at a speed that is up to 25 mph, but now there are special touch sensors to make sure that the driver keeps ahold of the wheel, and other thing that this passage said about the car is that no other car is advance this far. But there is always some negative things about these new cars like i said, about the GM has develped drivers seats that vibarteds when a vehicle is in danger of the backing into an object. The Goolge car simply announce when the driver should prepar to take over. | 1 |
How would you feel if you pulled up to a stoplight, and the person next to you was in the front seat, but wasn't driving? It would seem odd at first, but unfortuantely, there is a very good chance that that is the way things could be in the near future. Personally, I do not think that driverless cars should be invented. However, there are people that think that being able to go somewhere in a car without having to actually drive it would be a great idea. Driverless cars are not a good idea, because the cars may be more expensive since they are driverless, there could be malfunctions since the car would be made of new technology, and the people in the car would have to know when to be paying attention, in case of an emergency.
The first negative effect of having driverless cars, is the fact that the cars would probably be more expensive. Since the technology to make the cars would be expensive, the cars might be expensive themselves. If the cars are too expensive, no one would want to buy them unless they had a lot of money. Also, if not enough people are buying the cars, they might have to get discontinued eventually. If the cars had to get discontinued, everyone who already had one of those cars would be in hot water, becuase car repair people would not be able to fix their cars. This now leads me into my second reason why driverless cars should not be made.
What if the car has malfunctions? If there isn't an actual person driving the car, they won't be able to control the speed. The person will just have to trust the car to drive itself, and hope that it doesn't mess up, and accidently over accelerate and cause an accident. If the car did mess up while driving and caused an accident, someone would have to figure out whose fault it is. The article "Driverless Cars are Coming," made a good point by mentioning that if there is an accidnet, whose fault would it be - the driver or the company who made the car? There would defintiely be a big legal case to arise considering that the "driver" isn't technically driving the car.
The final reason that driverless cars should not be made, is because people would have to be able to learn to control the car. However, a positive thing about having driverless cars is that people would not need to take drivers ed anymore, but with a driverless car, you would still have to learn the ways of road. You would still need to be paying attention on the road. Just because your car would be driverless, doesn't mean that everyone's car would be driverless. For instance, if a wreck occured and you weren't paying attention in your driverless car, you wouldn't know whose fault it was, or if there was a way you could have stopped the wreck from happening. Going back to the text, the article mentions in paragraph seven that "This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires."
To conclude, driverless cars should not be created. Driverless cars is a situation where the bad outweighs the good. There might be some positives to having a driverless car, but driverless cars seems to risky. With accidents happening, because people are not paying attention to their driverless car is not something I want to be involved in. Driverless cars are not the best idea, because they could possibly be more expensive than our regular cars, they could possibly have malfunctions to put the "driver" and others at risk, and the "driver" may not have to take drivers ed, but they would have to learn how to work their new car, which means that they would need to be paying attention. A driverless car is not something that I would invest in, but I could see them becoming popular in the near future. | 3 |
I favor in to changing election by popular vote because it would be more fair to the people who are running and it would be quicker to decide who is president.
I think its better to be elected by popular votes because people actually like the person for a reason and actually listening to what that person is saying and actually agrees what he saying and they see something in that person instead of just having congress vote count mostly instead of the citizens.
And its not really fair that a person wins just because of his or hers own group of electors gets him to win it should just be based on popularity because its fair as i said before for example what if their was some person running for president and he was not really good to run the United States and yeah some people voted for him but he wasnt as popular but he won the election because of his group itb wouldnt really be fair because the people perferd the other guy better in office. Why because ethier people liked what he had for the states n what he would offer to the people and actually help us live good and thats what is important for the state its all about the people wants because thats how we will live right.
Also the person running for office might not have any electorial votes because theie campaigning wasnt heavy in a certain part of the state so they would oviously vote for the other person because they really havent seen what that person has to offer to them and he will have less succes in winning the election.
It can be argued that the Electoral College method of selecting the president may turn off potential voters for a canidate witch means that they can relie on their state as much so they really wouldnt pay attention to the campaign than they would have if the president were picked by a popular vote but of course no voters vote swings a national election.
And thats why I favor in popularity votes because its more fair for the canidates and its a better system in electing a president. | 2 |
My position on driverless cars is that i beleive they shouldn't be made. People are lazy enough as it is. Driving cars isn't a difficult tast to do and the last thing we need is for the car to drive by its self. This will cause people to be dependant on the car to drive its self and will not be as alert in the vehicle and will result in a crash. Cars have always been made to be driven by a person, not a computer.
The driverless cars will be ran by automotive radar sensors, GPS reciever, and an inertial motion sensor among ther devices. Those things could break at any given moment and the passenger(s) in the car won't know and will assume everyhting is fine, but seconds later they are in a crash just because the car devices are broken. When someone is in the diverless car they could fall asleep or just could not be paying enough attention. Even though the seat will viberate when the person needs to take over, they could be a heavy sleeper and they won't feel the vibration. The car requires that the driver needs to be alert and ready to take over if the road conditions are too much to handle for the car to drive its slef. What happens when the person isn't paying attention? A car accident could and will happen.
So many things could go wrong with cars, so why add to the problem? The driver of the car needs to be alert. How will we know if we can trust that person to stay attentive to the car? By the time the car alerts the driver and the driver takes over it might be too late. The car could back into something or een swerve off the road and hit someone. Technology has glitches. If there is a glitch with one of the devices then the result could be life threatening. We won't know if we should blame the car or the person. Driverless cars are life threatening. | 2 |
I am completely against the idea of the development of driverless cars. Laws, technical difficulties, and liability issues are all factors that make me doubt the good of driverless cars. Driverless cars could potentially be one of the largest safety problems on the road.
I say this because there are already laws in some states that prevent testing of these cars. The article says, "Most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers, and pedestrians safe, and lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers." This means that a law is made it is usually to advocate safety, the prevention of testing of the cars in some states make me doubt the safety of these cars. I don't think that driverless cars would be safe on the roads with so many variables in the environment.
If a car malfunctions or fails to alert the driver of an oncomming car it could be potentially fatal to both vehicles. Technical difficulties or the car failing to recognize a danger could easily be more unsafe than an impaired or student driver. A quote from the article would be, "Some manufacturers hope to do that (meaning making driving more fun) by bringing in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays. Such displays can be turned off instantly when the driver needs to take over..." If the car fails to alert the driver death could be a large option to consider. The car might not react in time to avoid a collision or a pedestrian, nothing in this world is 100%. I would rather take my chances on what could be considered dangerous drivers than rely on a car with no emotions.
There are also liabilities between drivers and the makers of the cars that could be an even larger problem resulting from technichal difficulties or human error. It would be difficult to distinguish between what would be the car's fault versus what would be the driver's fault. The article discusses, "While the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver," as a possoble solve for the liability problems. This could be a major problem due to breaches in privacy. If the car were to watch the person, the data must go somewhere and some data should be kept private. A lawsuit could easily errupt from a situation such as that, and will be a problem for both parties.
In conclusion, I believe driverless cars are not only a safety hazard but a privacy problem as well. The safety/technical difficulties, laws, and liabilities should be a concern for everyone before driverless cars are completely road legal. | 3 |
The Seagoing Cowboys program is place where can travel,stay with animals,and have fun time. Those are just a few reasons of many reason.
Seagoing Cowboys travel a lot with animals. They cross the Alantic Ocean and the Pacific Ocean alot. They also travel to places like China or Europe so if like travel Seagoing Cowboys program is the place to go."The cattle-boat trips unbelievable for a small town boy. Besides helping people, I had the side benefits of seeing Europe and China."
Another reason why you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program is you can stay with animals. If you like animals this is the place were you can visit them while you are traveling to drop them of. You can feed him while you guys are traveling. You would have to keep an eye on them and make sure they don't do anything.
The final reason you should be in the program is that you can find ways to have fun. Like volleyball and baseball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed. Some other games you could play to pass time is table-tennis,fencing,boxing,reading whittling. You wouldn't be bored after droping off animals because there would be enough room to play games.
The Seagoing Cowboys program is place where you can travel,stay with animals,and have a fun time. All those reasons are why you should come join the Seagoing Cowboys program. I think this is a great way to interact with animals and other seagoing cowboys. | 3 |
Driverless cars aren't a new topic to the automotive world. They weren't as advanced as they were now, but now they're much more advanced and more practical. Since we're in the modern era I can fully understand why people just want to hurry to make cars that drive themselves, but it just doesn't seem very practical. Driverless cars would have more faults than benefits to the road.
People just want to upgrade everything without seeing the faults in evolving. For example, the car still needs a driver to manage it, so why do you need to upgrade if it doesn't even fulfill its own namesake? The limited automotive use really just puts the driver at more risk, because of the possibility of a malfunction. On that note since the cars are lined with high tech equipment, and whatnot wouldn't the accident in that kind of vehicle be more severe? Something could explode, and injure much more than the drivers. This also would make one of these cars far more difficult to replace as it states in the article. With it being filled with sensors, and other high tech equipment this could lead to 100's of thousands of dollars being thrown out the window for repairs.
In the end the benefits of having a driverless car are outweighed by the faults.
The call is still pretty tough, since the idea is still underexplored as a whole. For all we know the problems could get worked, but manual cars won't become obsolete. Manual cars still retain the more benefits in my mind. | 2 |
Do you know the advantages and the disadvantages of having of not having a car? Yes, actually not having a car. Most people would freak out of the thought of not having a car some are just use to it. But could it actually save more money or would it cost more?
Vauban, Germany people have actually given up their cars, they call it "car-free." Not everyone has given up their cars. "The main thoroughfare, where the tram to downtown Freiburg runs, and a few streets on one edge of the community. Car ownership is allowed, but there are only two places to park- large garages at the edge of the development, where a car-owner buys a space, for $40,000, along with a home"- Source 1 by:Elizabeth Rosenthal. The Vauban's started getting involved and getting informed on not using a car. Soon 70 percent of Vauban's familiy does not own a car, and 57 percent sold a car to move to Germany. Some even liked the idea of not using a car "When I had a care I was always tense. I'm much happier this way" says Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two. She nows walks verdant streets where the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drown out the occasional distant motor. in 2006 Vauban completed, this is an example of growign trend in Europe, the united States and elsewhere to seperate suburban life from auto use, this is a movement of "smart planning." The advantage is you will have more access to public transportation, a disadvantage is if you live far from public places then you might have to walk or take a bus.
In Paris they have enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. On Monday motorists with even- numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine($31). Nearly 4,000 drivers were fined, according to Reuters. Twenty seven people had their cars impounded for their reaction to the fine. Diesels make up 67 percent of vehicles in France, compared to a 53.3 percent average of diesels engines int he rest of Western Europe, according to Reuters. The advantage of not having a car is that you wouldn't be spending money on gas, the disadvanteage is that you will be fined. Delivery companies complained of lost revenue, while exceptions were made fro plug-in cars, hybirds, and cars carrying three or more passengers. Public transit was free of charge from Friday to Monday. After the smog ruling French party to rescind the ban for odd-numbered plates on Tuesday. There is alot of disadvantages because would you have a work day on Tuesday and you have an odd numbered plate. Also soem people are not familar with the public transportation and some people may not think it's the best way to get around in town. You also have to get up eary to catch the bus, train, etc.
BOGOTA,Colombia- In a program that sets to spread to other countries, millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or tooked buses to work during a car-ffree day yesterda, leaving the streets of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams. This was their third staright year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis permitted for the Day Without Cars in this capital city of 7 million. The goal was to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. Violators faced $25 fines. In Bogota there were occasional rain showers . Some thought it was a good idea some not so much. "It's a good opportunity to take away stress in lower air pollution," said a businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife. Many countries have tried having a car-free day, and many succeeded. For the Unoted States President Obama ambitious goal was to curb the U.S greenhouse gas emissions, unveiled last week, will get a fortutious assit from incipient shift in American behavior. The studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by. In 2005 the United Stes peaked and dropped steadily thereafter, according to an analysis by Doug Short of Advisor Perspectives, an investment research company. As of April 2013, the number of miles driven per person was nearly 9 percent below the peak and equal to where the country was in January 1995.
So driving with a car or not it either good or bad because not driving could give you the excerise and driving just means you like your personal things. I think that when the government says it's a fine then follow the rules. Either way not having a car does has it advantages every country should have a car-free day. | 3 |
New software has been created to determine the facial expressions of students. It uses technology to give data as to what emotions someone is feeling such as happiness, sadness, and boredom. These technologies are possibly going to be used in classrooms to help students learn better based on their emotions towards the lesson that they are learning. However, the use of software to determine the emotional expressions of students in the classroom is not valuable to the students learning experience.
To start, in order for this new technology to work, students woukld have to constantly be watched by cameras that read their expressions. This is said in the text when it says, "Using imagery, the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movements," (D'Alto 4). One can see from this that the students would always have to be watched and their facial movements would all be recorded. This could be an issue of privacy for some students if they do not want to constantly be recorded. It also makes it easy for outside threats to hack this system and watch students or get personal information from the videos. Emotion-recognition software can also be expensive for schools, especially since it doesnt work on normal PC computers. The text states, " Your home PC can't handle the complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile," (D'Alto 7). This shows that normal computers that students would typically use cannot support this technology, making the school buy the technology that can support it. This would be a costly job and if the school cannot pay for it then the students would have to and some families may not be able to afford it. Lastly, students facial expressions may not directly correlate with the emotion they are feeling towards the lesson that they are learning. This can be seen in the text when it says, " A classroom computer could recognize when a stuent is becoming confused or bored," Dr Huang predicts. "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor,"" (D'Alto 6). This exemplifies that the schools want to use this technology to help students learn more effectively by using technology thats like a teacher. For some students this may cause trouble if they make facial expressions, but it's not about the lesson. Such as if a student is told something by another student and the student looks confused, the computer might see that and think they dont understand the lesson. Then it would modify the lesson for the student even if the student understood it just fine. A teacher would be much better at understanding the students emotions in a certain situation than technology.
Students need to be able to learn on their own and to communicate with teachers on how well they´re understanding what they´re learning. By using facial recognition technology, its taking away their communication skills. There are many flaws to the facial-expression technology that make it a bad candidate to use in schools. It´s certain that there are plenty of good uses for facial expression technology, however using it in schools is not one of them. | 4 |
Have you ever wondered why the Earth is so polluted? That is because so many cars are being driven and so many factories are being made. In some parts of Europe cars arent aloud to be driven its a car free zone. This is to help the Earth from all the pollution that is being caused all around us. Having so much pollution can kill our planet.
Many people around the world want to help our planet. Driving cars is easier but it is very bad for our plants and trees and for our own health. People in Colombia as said in source 3 are getting together and making this happened because they see th actual change behind all this. Some people might think this idea is crazy but it actual can work. We have over a billion cars driving around our Earth and all of that goes up to the air and we breath all of that and that makes our day look ugly and the Earth not look so pretty. Flowers have been growing faster after this idea was made natural air gives us strength.
In 2013 as said in source 4 they have investigated that Americans are driving less and getting less licenses. Driving less cars makes us live longer because we are not just sitting their in a car doing nothing we are actuve riding a bike or even walking. For those ong trips that take ours to get their we call a bus or a taxi and pay them to get their that is less cars and vehicles that are driving around hurting out planet. It is much better to have the world like this because you will see the population growing and people living longer and not passing away at an early age. Like this we dont breath that nasty air that cars let out and little kids dont have to breath it either like that when they grow up they will be strong and healthy.
A lot of people might think taht this idea is crazy but when they actual try it out they will start realizing how it well help our planet very much. When was th elast time you went out walking and then a car passes by you and all that gas air gets in your face? all of that air is very annoying and it gets you out of air right? well that is why its best to just walk everyone and if your really that lazy just call a taxi our a bus to pick you up. | 2 |
A face on Mars? In 2001 there were pictures take by NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft on Mars. Those pictures revealed what many believe was a face. When NASA revealed the picture for all to see they had called it "a huge rock formation." They stated, "it was formed by shadows giving the ilusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." It then became a pop icon.
Some people think the Face is evience of life on Mars. Theorists say NASA was trying to hide the evidece, where defenders of the NASA budget "wish there was an ancient civilization on mars." So, in 1998 scientists flew over Cydonia taking pictures of what many call the "Face" ten times sharper than before. When those pictures were released it was revealed to be a natural landform. But many argued otherwise.
For the third time in 2001, scientists went to take another look. The camera they had used proved to be much more accurate than the one used in the first Viking photo in 76. The pixels of the camera were 1.56 meters compared to 43 meters per pixel. According to scientists if there were any objects in the picture such as airplanes or Egyptian pyramids they would be able to be seen.
It is proven that the picture actaully showed butte or mesa landform. These landforms are very common around the West. The landform found was even compared to "the Snake River Plain of Idaho." Which is a dome about the same size size as the Face on Mars.
It is sad to say that there are proven facts that reveal there is no such thing as the "Face on Mars". For years scientists have been studying life on Mars. Even in 1976, 39 years ago! | 2 |
Think back to the day you got your license. The thrill of being able to drive and knowing how much more independce you would have. You want your kids to enjoy that experience too, right? Well what if that all went away because of driverless cars. I am against driverless cars because, driving helps you learn responsibility, the technology could fail or malfunction, and liablity arguments would arise.
When teens learn to drive they are given the rules and regualations. Remembering these rules and following them is their responsibility. With driverless cars the drivers or people in the drivers seat would have less responsibilty because they do not have to do as much work. In the article it says that the driverless cars can steer, accelerate, and break themselves. Since the driver has to do less they may not always pay attention becuase they would think it is the cars job to handle the driving. Carless drivers would make people more lacidazicle about driving. Driving teaches people to be responsible, without this how will we instill responsiblity into the people on our roads?
In todays society new technologies come out everyday. However, we know how frusterating technology can be if it doesn't work. If our Iphone or laptop glitches it usually isn't a big deal. It can be fixed in an instant, maybe even by yourself. But what could the consequences be if a driverless car glitches? While you are driving you don't really have a minute to google how to fix your car like you can do with an Ipad. Just like any new technology a driverless car could have malfunctions, but these malfunctions could but peoples lifes at risks. People may say that even today with people driving cars that there can be glitches in cars. However, since real people are driving the cars they can evaluate the situation and control the car.
If the driverless car does fail whose fault is it? The "driver" or the manufacturer? This question will definetly come up if driverless cars come into our society. If you get in a crash, but weren't in control of the car, how can you be blamed? This problem could to lead to new laws, many court cases, and law suits.
Driving is a right of passage for teens today. Driverless cars, while could make life easier, would just bring more problems and arguments into our already technology filled lives. Driverless cars should not be legal because driving teaches responsibilty, the technology could fail, and cause arguments over liability. | 4 |
Their are so many things you can do to help keep the envierment safe to live in. Some countys world wide have already started taking these procations to protect the earth. The thing these countries have decided to change in their everyday life is to take cars away or start limiting the use of them. Now this might sound like a big deal but their are many advantages to this appeal of motor use.
Some advantages of cars being limited or just not used at all, would mean we would be saving more money. Just think about all the money you throw away to put it towards your car. Their are bills, repairs, new car if you get into a bad acident, ect. The list just goes on and on. Their could be so much more you could spend your money on and it could make are economy richer.
In source 3: car-free day is sprinning into a big hit in Bogota by Andrew Selsky it states that " In Bogota people who violated the car usage would be faced witha fine of $25". This is another way of showing you how much money you are wasting on your car.
Another advantage to not owning or using a car would be the pollution levels in the earths atmosphere would go down. In sourse 2:paris bans driving due to smog by Robert Duffer it states that "after days of near-record pollution, paris enforced a parital driving ban to clean the air of the global city". Now the people of the world should have never let pollutin get this bad. The french more of paris had smog (a type of pollution) for at least a week. In sourece 4: the end of the car culture by Elizabeth Rosenthal it states that "As of April 2013, the number of miles driven per person was nearly 9 percent below the peak and equal to where the country was on January 1995". So the cars limitations is actually helping lower the number of miles which means the pollution rate is also going down.
Their are many advantages to not using or at least limiting the use of a car. such as reducing the money that is spent on one which wouls help the economy out. Also reducing the the polluction that cars produce. These are just some of the small advantages that come with the reduction and limitations of cars in the world we live in today. | 3 |
Most teenagers are eager to get their license, but with the amount of cars being bought and used declining, it seems as if most don't mind not being able to drive. While it may be extrememly hard to not own a car in our society, there are many advantages of limiting car usage.
Pollution has always been an issue in our world, mostly because of cars. Diesel fuel was blamed for "near-record pollution" in Paris, and driving was banned to clear the air. Because cars cause so much pollution that it forces us to ban them, it is therefore causing us to slow the buying on them. As of April 2013, the number of miles driven per person was nearly 9 percent below where they were in January of 1995. This may be because most Americans cannot afford a car these days, but not owning a car will definitely not burn a hole in our wallets.
Not only are cars consuming of our space (with a car comes a garage), they are comsuming of our money as well. Gas prices have been and are currently rising, which makes it very difficult for some car-owners to pay for other important necessities in their lives, such as children.
Limiting car usage has also made an impact on some people's mood. In Vauban, Germany, 70 percent of families do not own cars, and it has been more than beneficial. Media trainer and mother of two Heidrun Walter says "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." For example, you might have had a bad day, or are upset about something and are driving home from work. Your anger channels into your driving and causes an accident. This all could have been avoided if we cracked down on the usage of cars.
Overall, cars have been very beneficial for our society, but we get even more benefits if we stop using them. Pollution can be reduced, money can stay in our bank accounts, and moods can be positively changed if we stop using cars. | 2 |
The Face of the Alien on Mars
Have you ever wonderd what the face on Mars is? I have and I'm here to tell you about what I know about this face or piece of land on Mars. Would you discrice the land to be something the alien's made. Well working with NASA has tought me some things. And I will tell you what this face on Mars is now let's get started.
We found out that the face is just a landmark of Mars it's not a face. The way the cloud's were facing and the shadowing made it look like a face. And Now that we know it's not something another race made we don't have to worry as much. We also know that we took that photo in 1976 and again in 1998. We have inproved our cameras by a good amount since the last time we took it. Then when we took it in 2001 the image was much clearer and we could see the photo.
From the text it say's that we took 3 photo's of the site as year's went on. In fact we didn't have high-resolution or 3D image's back then. So we didn't really have the technology back then and now we do. Sending another robot take's year's to get to Mars and time, taking photo's that is another problem. Now that we have better technology for this we can take better picture's.
To explain this the cameras that we had back then really didn't have good pixle resulution. So we really couldn't get a good picture to capture this exciting moment of history. Plus we can now get excited about our trip to Mars later on. And we know what to expect a little bit. They said that we would take off to Mars in 2020 or around that time. And we need trained and willing people to take on the mission.
Now to sum this all up into one paragraph, ok let's see if i can do it. The face of the Alien on Mars really is a landmark not really a alien. By the look of the picture, the weather during the shot of the photo had dust and other partical's that were in the way. And the shadow's made it look like it was a face. And when we attempt to reach Mars in 2020 we know what to expect when the day come's. I hope you enjoyed reading this as much as I enjoyed typing it. Hope that you learned something from this. And I hope you have a good day and I will see you in the next one. | 2 |
The future iscoming soon everday. And everyday people and inventors try to change our world upside down which they call ilfe changing aspects. To actually take away driving cars that people can take care of and moblie it by themselves, is not helping the future in any way. It's common sense to not call it a car anymore. Your not driving it, it's driving you! With driverless cars, no one will ever be able to monerver their way around the world. Depending on technology is bad, not good but at the same time it's helpful in many ways. This whole ̈́Driverless Cars' make the road signs and laws very unimportant. Why would you need to pass a test for your license when you can just jump in a car and command it what to do! We learn to drive for many reasons. One of them is memorizing. Remembering which way you came from is a great way to pratice on memorizing. With this tecnique you can understand the roads and signs without having to ask anyone where to go. But if you have a driverless car, you'll end up like the people who must ask every stick and tree they see on the road for help. It's useless to have a driverless car when you can monurver yourself around town! For example: ¨GM has developed driver's seats to vibrate when the vechile is in danger of backing into an object. The Google car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over." ( Paragraph 7.) That is just ridiculous. If we ever do have driverless cars in the future, there will be a possible 95% that the world will be even more stupider because of how lazy some people can be to create such things. Driverless cars will not do any good for the future except currpt and slow the mind frame or children and adults. Learning the signs and controlling the car is much better than having a car drive you. You should never
place your life into the hands of technology, it's better to learn on your own and master it with time. Technology might try to prevent a lot of accidents in the future but they're doing it the wrong way. You can't escape trouble, especially if technology is involved. Something will always go wrong if you can't take control over it. NO matter how many times they might try to make the world better with a sim card or parts of a machine. Nothing except the person
themselves will ever be able to help or control their own things. Cars are just cars. While people are just people. | 2 |
Back when Viking 1 took the original photo of the Face on Mars, people have thought that it was an alien symbol. NASA as since debunked this theory. With the improved pictures from the Mars Global surveyor, it is very clear to see that it is a natural landform, just like those on Earth. The Face on Mars is easily identified as a natural landform. The Face on Mars cannot be an alien artifact because it has been proven to be a mesa by photographs, is thought to be alien because of movies and magazines, and was created by shadows.
One of the best ways to prove that things exist is through pictures. This was shown to be true by the most recent picture of the Face, back in April 8, 2001. By this most recent picture, it is clear to see that the "eyes and nose" of the Face were created by shadows casted by the rock formations. With the 1998 picture, it was thought that something might be hidden behind the clouds present that day. Since this most recent picture was taken on a clear day, there is no way that it could be confused for something else, or anything could be hidden.
Along with clear photographs, the Face is only relevant because of theorist and popular culture. Like the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars" says, "The Face on Mars has since become a pop icon." The author goes on to say that it has starred in a movie, books, and magazines.
If the Face hadn't become so famous, it is possible that theorist wouldn't even have claimed it as alien artifact.
The final reason that the Face couldn't be a face is because it was created by shadows. If the face had been viewed by the Viking 1 on a different day, it is possible that nobody would have thought that it was a face. As can be seen by the different photos, which were likely taken at different times of day, the shadows are much less prevolent on the mesa. It is still recognizable as the Face, but only very slightly. Along with that, there are also many also possible landforms that, under the right circumstances, looks like a face because of shadows.
Based on all of the evidence, it is impossible to think that the Face on Mars was created by aliens. Even with all of the pictures taken, and most references being from the media, and how the creation was based on the time of day, it is difficult to believe that people still believe this. While some people might still believe this, there are many ways that this has been proven wrong. These are just a few of them. | 3 |
Imagine one day your on your way to work and suddenly theres a crash right in front of you, the first thing you try and do is avoid being apart of the wreck.
If your in your "Driverless car" you cant do anything to avoid the wreck because the car cant respond as fast as a human being. Also what if the car sensors mess up and you cant do anythog about it your pretty much done for.
If people are getting to lazy to drive their own cars I think we will have bigger problems then just trying to develop a driverless car. Also imagine the cost of a driverless car. Half of Americans are in debt right now. How is someone going to be able to afford a driverless car. Imagine the amount of money being put in to the research for developing these driverless cars. Also what are you suppose to do if your driving down the road and see a resturant that you want to stop at how are you suppose to tell the car to immediately go there.
Also of your going on a road trip there's no way your goung to make it all the way to florida without having to assist the "driverless car". It is almost to difficult to develop a driverless car that is comepletly driverless. | 1 |
The author of this article has some really good points on how the Facial Action Coding System is useful for the students in the classroom. Even though the computers could tell you how another person is feeling you could also do the same with your closest frineds and family because you kmow them so well. The computers have no idea who you are but they still know what emotion you are feeling just by how the bones in your face are working together.
The computer will form a 3-D model of the face. All of the 44 major muscles have to work exactly like the human muscles in the model. They have classified six basic emotions such as: happiness, surprise, disgust, anger, sadness, and fear. Most people like to hide their emotions with thier face so people don't know that something is wrong. The computer could see right through that and see exactly what emotion is going on.
In the classroom students that are shy or don't ask for help often lie to their teacher and tell them that they understand exactly whats goingon and exactly what they're doing. If we had those computers in the classrooms then the teachers could help us more by knowing the truth. The teachers could figure out a better way to teach the lesson so the kids are'nt so confused.
These computers could change lives but not many people probably see that since it's just another piece of technology. Imagine using this for someone yu are teaching or explaining something to yoou would want them to learn whatever that is you're helping them with would'nt you? But if that person is scared or shy they wouldn't be so easy to tell you that they don't understand. If we used these computers properly and not just as some toy then we could change how education is taught and it not being so difficult to understand so you could recieve better education quality.
Teachers already try their best to help their students but sometimes it's just more difficult than it seems. Children like to give attitude when not understanding something or when they feel like the teacher is judging them because they don't understand something. When it comes to school and work it's alot of stress and focusing but if teachers had a better way to recognize the emotions of their students it'd be easier for them to help them out instead of leaving them there and not understand anything.
I feel as if teachers would like the idea of having one of these computers in their classroom because not only does it benefit their students but it also benefits them by helping their generation out and not letting their students fail but to become successful. So I think that having these in the classroom would be very valuable and helpful for everyone. | 3 |
The Unusual Rock Formation
When the "Face of Mars" was discovered many people had very different accusations and claims. Many people(including scientists) thought it was created suddenly by aliens. Although, that can be a possibility, it really wasn't the case for this certain situation. The reason being, was because NASA along with its scientists have many reasons for the "Face of Mars" to be a just a natural landform on Mars. They even have enough evidence to supprt their perspectives of the identity of the "Face of Mars".
First, the scientists took many sharpening images to see all the specific details of the this natural rock formation. In the article, it states that photographing Cydonia became a priority of NASA. That this huge rock formation was only made by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth. The scientist not only took one photo, and were done with the discovery, they took many photos. As the article shows that they took many photos from 1976, 1998, and 2001, the scientists took the information they had, and came to a conclusion, that this was only a gigantic rock formation.
Furthermore, when the scientists took the photos, they also discovered that this landform didn't have anything unusual because they can basically see everything from their spacecraft. As the article states, they took the digital image three times bigger than the pixel size. This mean that the scientists throughout the years have made this photos more and more sharpenly to see all the details, and see exacly what this mystery of a rock formation is. So, when they took the pixel size larger and larger they realized they reached the end of their discovery. The reason was because it was really zoomed it, that even if there were Egyptian-style pyramids or small shacks you could see them.
Then, even though the concluding statement was that it was only a rock landform, many people argue that it was an usual formation created by aliens. Scientists and other people believe it was an alien aritifact. Even though the scientists couldn't get a valuable picture of the formation because of the wispy clounds, many people believed that it was skeptics alien markings hidden by the haze. On the other hand, this couldn't be true because aliens could easily still cover the formation, but that didn't happen because the scientist ended up taking realistic photos of the face rock.
In conclusion, the "Face of Mars" is only a simple rock landform with an unusual formation of a human face. There are many reasons why,including the photos, and how they came to be much sharper and detailed by the range of the pixels. Also, the rock formation was in Cydonia, whcih really wan't a mysterious plant, considering that NASA immediately got informed by it.
Even though, there has been enough evidence in photos, many people believe it was created mysteriosly be aliens. In the end, it's just a landform in a whole different planet, so how can one simple face-like formation be created by aliens? | 4 |
When I first read the Article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" I was sheocked at how this technology was able to read emotions off of a painting. It described her as 83 percent happy, 9 percent discusted, 6 percent fearful and 2 percent angry. This is all identified by software innovated by Prof. Thomas Huang, in collaboration with Prof. Nicu Sebe. Dr. Huang and his colleaugue are experts at developing better ways for humans and computers to communicate. I think it's a good idea becuase it could help people better understand the emotions of people who don't communicate as much.
"The facial expressions for each emotion are universal" says Dr. Huang, "even though individuals often show varying degrees of expression" Using video imagery the new emotion-recoognition software tracks these facial movements; in a real face or a painted face of Mona Lisa. This sofware can also identify mixed emotions; each expression is compared against a neutral face (showing no emotion). This really shows how much a computer can do. Dr. Huang said "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored", "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." Your home PC can't handle complex algorithms used to decode Mona Lisa's smile. But we can write down simple instructions that "encode different emotions.
I think that this is a great step towards the future and the possibilities could be endless when understanding emotions. It could not only benefit yourself, but others around you in how your feeling. | 1 |
The FACS
FACS got your attenshion right yeah the FACS is a facial action coding system. The FACS can tell the person how the the person feels just by looking at there face like and exmaple is the Mona Lisa they read irs face withe the FACS. They said it was 83% happy 9% disgusted, 6% fearful and 2% angry. It is useful but i dont think it should be used in classrooms to read students. 3 reasons why I think thats teh FACS should't be allowed in school are sometimes people dont want to talk about ther lifes in school and another reason is that it would go to kids personal lifes and the last reason is it may make kids feel weird knowing that others know how they feel and so will there parents .
Going back to the first reason that may sometimes people dont want to talk about ther lifes in school. Sometimes people dont want to talk about ther lifes in school kids may think others kids will make of them for being sad or fearful. An exmaple of a kid being scared of what other will think of them for being scared or super kind are bullies. Bullies most of time become the way they are is becaues they feel like others will hate them the way they are or hey have been juged becaues of there feelings.
Lets get into another reason that the FACS would be a bad thing to have in schools is that it would go to kids personal lifes and most kids dont like talking about they'r home life. you may say it would take some presser off the kids if they feel bad or sad and we could talk to them. But some kids that don't want to talk about it and the kids that feel ok will feel like the sad kids get more attenshion so will want to be sad. Like when i was younger i used to want attenchion so if kids find a key to get attenshion they will want to be sad.
The last reason is it may make kids feel weird knowing that others know how they feel. Also it may make the kids parents feel weird or angry becaues they probly dont want people basicly spying on there kids. If i were one of the kids dad i would want the school spying on my kid. If alots of parents feel that way and which schools the school with the FACS will lose lots of money.
3 reasons why I think thats teh FACS should't be allowed in school are sometimes people dont want to talk about ther lifes in school and another reason is that it would go to kids personal lifes and the last reason is it may make kids feel weird knowing that others know how they feel and so will there parents. That is why i dont want the FACS in schools. | 2 |
Twenty five years ago NASA’s Viking 1 spacecraft was circling Mars, taking photos of possible landing sites for its companion vessel Viking 2. While looking over a region of Mars called Cydonia, controllers of Viking one at the Jet Propulsion Lab were stunned to see what looked like a giant head almost two miles long from top to bottom. They quickly came to a conclusion that it was just another
Martian mesa, commom in Cydonia. Although there were some skeptics.
The “Face on Mars” became an icon. It was talked about on radio shows, it was written about in books and magazines even placed in grocery store checkout lines. Some belived that the face was proof of ancient civilizations. Although few scientists believed the Face was an alien artifact. Global Surveyor (MGS) arrived at the Red Planet in Sept. 1997, eighteen long years after the Viking missions ended. Jim Garvin, a cheif scientist for NASA said “We photographed the Face as soon as we could get a good shot at it.”
Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team photographed the face ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. Thousands of web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, The photograph uncovering a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all. But some were not satisfied.
The Face on Mars can be found at 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was winter in April ’98—a cloudy time of year on Mars. The camera on board MGS had to look through clouds to see the Face. Maybe, said some skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze. Mission controllers decided to look again. “It’s not easy to target Cydonia,” said Garvin
“In fact, it’s hard work.” Mars Global Surveyor is a mapping spacecraft that normally looks straight down and scans the planet like a fax machine in narrow 2.5 km-wide strips.
In all scientist uncovered that the mysterious "Face" on Mars wasn't a face at all, just a regular Martian mesa. Using high definition cameras and updating old pictures. it wasn't the end of a mystery or a stunting of imagination, it was the beging of a new thirst for deep space exploration. | 3 |
Is the Face on Mars real? In my opinion the Face on Mars is real. Here are my reasons why.
The Face on Mars is real because it can be a natural landform on Mars just like we have natural landforms on Earth. Now may I ask a question? How can ailens make a face on Mars? In the picture provided, it seems the face pops out and there is no evidence that a creature could have made a face with no flaws. In the article, a webiste states " thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on JPL web site, revealing...a natural landform."
I understand that people may have a theory about the face, but hence the word theory. Theory is just a guess with evidence supporting the claim, but is there enough evidence to support the Face? People from NASA have studied the Face since it first appeared in 1976. Since then, people have found claims and have had facts about the face proving it is just a natural landscape.
How did the face appear? There can be many reasons on how the face appeared on Mars. There could have been a storm on Mars that caused the ground to move upright and form the Face. The face could have been on Mars since Mars was created and NASA just never payed enough attention until 1976. I do not believe an ailen created the Face on mars.
Is the face on Mars real? Keep that question in your head. I believe this essay has provided enough evidence proving the Fac on Mars is just a natural landform. That's just my opinion. What's your opinion? | 2 |
Would you like helping countrys thourght world war 2 .If so you should consider being a seacowboy a seacowboy is a person who basicaly brings animals across seas . I antisapate you should be a seacowboy because the text states that World War 2 was over while countrys were left in ruins ,UNRR needed to take care of animals, and this is the opportunity of a life time .
To begun with
World War 2 was over while citys were demolished
So theys citys could thrive once agin they needed food and animals . Peoples homes were destroyed . You could assist by becoming a seacowboy .
In addition to UNRR needed to take care of animals . UNRR is a sociaty that stands for United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration . UNRR sort of sponsered and are seacowboys this explains that if you are a seacowboy you work for UNRR .
In conclusion this chance to become a seacowboy is an opportunity of a lifetime . you get to ride with animals across a sworming sea . you can incounter new objects . you can bring back a thriving comunity for others to enjoy and relax becase you tryed to assist in journy .You may convince other people to acopony you, on your journy across the deep maybe terrofing pitch black deepes of water smashing and colodes toghether, in the enourmas body of cold salt water .
This supportes that becomeing a seacowboy helpes the fact that World War 2 was over while countrys were left in ruins , UNRR needs to asisst animals needs and thi sis a gigantic opportunity.
so you should really suggest you to consantrat on this opportunity . | 2 |
Nobody know how the face got on mars because we never been their. This face could of been their from the jump and ya'll said it was a human face i never seen a face of a human shaped like that a day in my life. You see how the earth changed dont you think ohther plantes form in other shapes like i said people we have no evidence that an alien shaped this face on mars. How we know NASA didnt do this? they can do every thing eles like having a little car drive around on mars and see whats all their and bring littel rocks back from mras. People we got to understand that they is just trying to get our MONEY out of us why you think strang things come out of no were and then they put it on the web. Thats why they make us think stuff is out their like this how you know they didnt just make something that can carve this face on mars an now they trying to say it was aliens that did this. You got to think outside the box people dont let these people trick you for your money because the more attention you give them the more money you give them so please people open your eyes. | 0 |
The Viking 1 photo taken in 1976 is a photo from Mars of what seems to be a face-looking structure. Many believe that this is some sort of alien life form left behind, but some believe the reality, in which this is just some type of land structure or a land-form.
This land structure has shadows and divets on it that resemble the facial details of a human face. NASA has been searching for alien life-forms or any life on another planet for years and some believe that they have finally accomplished this. A lot of people think that this is some sort of fossil or ingravement of a once-living alien or a species of unknown classification.
As this very well could be the case, with the fact that it is sort of engraved into the ground of the planet, the most likely explanation of this abnormality is this--this is a coincidental pattern on this rock-like form. There is no more to it. Coinicidental.
As stated in Paragraph 5, this form has spraked a lot of attention throughout the years. Many people believe many different theories; some reasonable, and some not. Conspiracy Theorists state that they believe NASA is hiding more evidence about this, but that cannot be true, because if this was a life-form, NASA would be rolling in fame, not hiding it from the world.
This is Mars we are talking about. We have tried for years and years to get human life onto this planet, and to attempt at finding life as well. The conditions of Mars are unbearable, so there is no possible way a creature could survive. We're not ET.
As stated in Pararaph 12, Garvin says, "It reminds me most of Middle Butte n the Snake River of Idaho." This is most definently a landform. Mars is considered the Red Planet. Mars is covered in dirt, grime, and dust. This could have easily formed with winds hitting the dirts.
As you can see in the progression of the pictures, these are obviously shadows from the sun, or dirt formations. If this was a life-form, these divets in the body would not be fading away, they would stay fossilized and stay put. In 1998, it does not even look like a face, nonetheless in 2001, either.
Next, as you can tell in the lower image featured in the paragraph, you can see another structure just a couple of feet to the left of the "face", and nobody seems to care about that. It does kind of look like an animal, so are we just going to question every single little pebble that we find on a planet? Didn't think so.
In conclusion, this 1976 photo taken on Mars by the Viking 1 spacecraft is most definently a landform of some kind. There is no possible way that a creature could sustain life on a planet like this. This discovery is obviously just a hoax or a coincidental find. If scientists had found this structure a couple of years later, it would not have looked like this face, so they would have never even questioned it. | 3 |
Dear, Senator of Florida
After reading this story/argument i think we should remove the Electoral college, why? Because i think we shoud be able to have the final vote, not the electoral voters. It states in paragraph 15 that "it is the electors who elect the president, not the people." "when you vote for a presidential candidate you're actually voting for a slate of electors." (paragraph 15) the reason why is cause they vote on the more who has the responsibility on taking part as president.
The electoral college has 538 electors and about 270 electoral vote are required to elect president. There is one member of the house in your state of representatives also 2 for your senate. But in the district of columbia therenis allocated 3 electors that are treated like a state. This election is held every four yearson the Tuesday after the first Monday of November. So when you vote, you dont vote for the whivh presidnt your actualy voting for the candidtes electors.
"It is possible that the winner of the electoral vote will not win national popular vote. But in the year 2000, Gore had more popular votes then Bush,and Bush had less fewer electoral votes. This yet has not happened very rarely, but it was the first time ever since 1888." That only happened cause the elctoral votes made it happen. some informstion i put up there is to inform you what they do and how many votes are required to elect president compared to the thousands of people voting for the president.
I say that the electoral college is unfair! why? well there's resons. The first is cause they lost the presidency the year 2000 with Gore and Bush. Second of all people who favored the seperation of race.
We, people shoud be able to vote on the president to make our vote count! Not on just voting for the electors the elect the president. Let our votes be heard to the people not the just the elctoral college. | 2 |
Usage of cars has been decreasing due to the effects it can have on the environment and the opinions of the public. Driving has had a major impact on the atmosphere due to it's polluting effects. Smog covers highly populated cities where driving is just another way of carrying out everyday-life. Though transportation by car has been a huge help in economic progress, it still comes with a price.
If we had no cars there would be less deaths, decreased enviromental instability, and shorter use for our limited amount of fuel. Texting/drinking and driving are some of the biggest causes of death in vehicles. The number of deaths caused by texting or drinking when driving has skyrocketed over the years. These areas where driving is prohibited are probably very safe places and the number of deaths brought about by driving are most likely little to none.
But life without cars can pose for some serious problems. Yes, it may cause fewer deaths and decrease pollution. But, it will also bring about issues such as; limited transportation of goods, infestation of the homeless (not a joke), and many inexperienced drivers when they are needed. In war, mobile transportation by car or truck is often needed. If people who can't drive are appointed to tasks such as driving, they won't be much help and could make things worse. Yes, they could be taught but time is not everlasting.
But all negatives aside, the suburban areas of the world could become much safer places without cars. No kids would get accidentily ran-over when their ball rolls into the street and the try to retrieve it. It would just be a much safer environment. Teens have no interest in learning to drive nowadays because they're either too lazy, or they see the effects it has on the world. of course trains and emergency transportation will be needed though. But regular cars and vehicles aren't a neccessary attribute to everyday life.
In conclusion, cars that don't serve a neccessary purpose aren't needed. What are the cars that do? Those vehicles would be firetrucks, ambulances, and other emergency vehicles. But cars ment for our own personal transportation can be left out of the picture. Now if only we could do the same about drugs... | 1 |
Its a great idea to have something read what your're feeling. That way teachers can know what there students are feeling. That can also help the teacher to find ways to help the student.
The person reading the other person feelings can know how that person is feel so that way they can help them out. Like if the person is feeling sad,mad,or similar feelings like that they will know that they have to try to find a way to cheer them up.
This would be a great expirces that teachers can try and also students,other people. Peolpe can learn new things like how to cheer up a friend. Or how to make someone feel better.
This is a good resorceful way to use technolgy. We should be using technoligy for good not bad and this would be a good way. That way from this expirement we can learn to make other ways to use it for good. | 1 |
I think the technology called the Facial Action Coding System is valuable because I think it is a very big advantage of using this type of technology and it gets more work done and also less thinking into the drawings or other types of things that could involve using this technology.
An example from the article is " we humans perform this same impressive "calculation" every day. For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on there faces" Another thing why I think this type of technology is going to be useful, Is because maybe in the future all of the work could be handed over to the technology, Letting the technology do the work for us, Which would make it much easier for humans and less stressful to think about.
In conclusion I think my statement towards this article is reasonable, Because I think many or some people would agree with it, I think many people would love to have a less stressful job, Sometimes it can get stressful in thinking what to do for the painting. | 1 |
DEAR, Senator
Changing the electoral college would not be an great idea due to the fact that it has been around for centuries and would negatively impact the voting system. Some believe the voting system is a very unfair and outdated system because of the electoral college. When changing the system to popular vote it will affect many people, it may also come out worse than the electoral college. 3 big points why the electoral college should stay the same is one because the electoral college has been around keeping voting in place for centuries. The second great point is that a disaster only happend once. Then the third main point is the winner take all idea is a great idea for the electoral college.
The electoral college has been around forever so why change it now. Some belive that the electoral college is a good idea Because of the voting way in the electoral college system voters vote not for the president but for a slate of electors. which is good because people need to have a leader of there state and that leader shows them which president is really good for whta they do. Presidents talk about what they are gonna do to help the country and the slate elelctors define what the presidents are gonna do to help out that certain state. Then the people of the state vote there slate electors for good reasons. The electoral system should stay around alot longer the system is just rigt for voting.
The electoral college is in good shape for staying and not changing a disater only happend once 14 years ago back in 2000. That means at least 3 elections happend since then and nothing went wrong. Even though if the electoral college system is such a good system then why was there such confusion in th200 fiasco. That makes the electoral college system look very bad becuase it can keep it's voting in balance at all. This was only once, If the system changes then this could happen more than many more times. Then soon we won't even know which president wins the election.
The electoral college looks really good due to the "winner-take-all"
system which awards all electors to the winning presidential canidate. some say this is far but others believe the "proportional representatin" system, the system that the state governor prepares a "Certificate of Ascertainment", which list all the canidates who ran for president in the state along with the names of there respective electors.
In overall the eletoral college should stay due to the fact that the electoral college has been around keeping voting in place for centuries, a disaster only happend once and finally is the winner take all idea is a great idea for the electoral college. so let's not try new stuff keep the electoral college. | 2 |
As stated in source two, Al Gore won the popular vote when running for president against Bush, but lost the presidency by getting less votes from the electoral college. The American people were given a chance to vote but were overruled by the votes of the electoral college. Saying that, i believe the electoral college should be elliminated and the presidency should be determined by popular vote.
When citizens go to vote for president, they arent really voting for president. They are voting for that canidates electors in the electoral college. Americans should be able to directly vote for who they want to be president. By switching to popular vote only and abolishing electoral college, citizens have more of a say in there own country, rather than eveything going to a slate of electors who have the power to overrule the popular vote.
Although it may have some upsides, such as helping with very close elections, it is regarded as an anachronism. It is non-democratic and i believe it is unfair. The canidate who recieves the most popular vote should be garintied to win.
All in all, in agreement with source two, the electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. It would better the voting system if we went to only popular vote and illiminated the electoral college. | 2 |
Have you ever thought about what life would be like if we didn't have to drive? It wouldbe pretty surprising right? People all around the world wouldn't have to waste time learning how to drive because the cars would already know how the drive themselves.This would be amazing! How would you feel about a car driving you everywhere? The future will be truly special someday!
There are many discoveries to driverless cars that have been made throughout history. For instants,
Google discovered cars that could drive themselves under certain circumstances since 2009. The cofounder of google named Sergey Brin, believes that the cars would fundamentally change the world in many ways.
Even though the cars aren't all the way driverless they can still help actual drivers when they are in the car by alerting them of issues when driving. There has also there had been smart road that have worked amazingly well, so who's to say the driverless cars won't?
Google had even modified different cars to where there are sensors, video camera's on the rearview mirror's, GPS recievers, motion sensors, and many different other things to help the diverless cars mimic the skills of an actual human wheel. The different sensors have progessed of time. They can detect and react to the dangerous skids and rollovers that can happen while on the road. The sensors can also inform drivers when they need to use the brakes, making it safer for people and other drivers around them.
Although you may think the cars are all driverless, they still need the help of human drivers. Drivers can help navigate through varies work zones and avoid accidents around them. This requires that pople must be alret when they are in the car at all times. There are also vibrators in the seat that alert the drivers if they are too close to another car when they are backing up too. The manufactures are also looking into different types of camera's that help the car watch the driver, even if the driver is watching the road. That's great!
These driverless cars are really amazing. There are different things that help them makes the roads and human drivers drive safely. The idea of having a car that can drive it's self is wonderful. This can truly help the world be a better place in the future that's yet to come! | 3 |
My position on driverless cars is i personally believe the idea is crazy! I say this because you never what could be the outcome of of this car. Another reason i say this is because these cars still have a driver. There is alot of what if's with this idea. I personally would not a take a chance, and put my life in a cars hands, and i dont believe others should either.
The articles gives give reaonsing to have these cars, and bad reasoning to have these cars. I agree with thwe article on some the good reasonings such as fuel. Sergey says the car he forsees would use half of the fuel of today's taxis, and offer far more flexiability than a bus. This is just a car he forsees, this does not make this a fact about a driverless car. Sergey believes these cars would fundamentally change the world. In my opinon these cars could harm the world.
Google has cars that has driven more than half a million miles without a crash. These cars are the cars that are not completly driverless. The google cars have alert the driver. I personally think this still does not mean anything. I say this because a person may lose their life in a split second, with this being said this car could be a few seconds late to alert the drive and the driver was not paying attention then BOOM! Theses cars have alot of what if's, and i definitely will not be looking forward to find out one.
Inconclusion these are my reasons i believe this idea is. This is my opinon and you never maybe these cars will revelousionize the world, but theres always a chance that these cars may cause damage to the world as well. As you can see i dont believe these cars will be very useful. I also dont believe these cars will as Sergey saod fundamentally change the world. I could not put my life on technology. If i dont ride roller coasters why should i ride in a driverless car? | 2 |
"Driverless Cars Are Coming" is a passage which talks about the development of driverless cars. Driverless cars are currently in development but hope to see the roads of the world in a few years. They can change the way that everyone lives their normal lives since transportation will be evolved. Driving will be different than it has ever been before and once again society will have to learn how to use new technology. Driverless cars should be developed and made available to use by the public.
First, driverless cars can help make the roads safer and less accident prone. In the recent years accidents have become a normal event to witness in everyday life. That's why driverless cars are going to be equipped with technology that allows the driver to know when they have to take the wheel. "GM has developed driver's seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger of backing into an object." Another example that driver less cars will make the roads safer are they can help keep the driver focused. Accidents that happen on a daily basis are mostly caused by distrctions in or around the vehicle. Driverless cars will lower the distration rate by alerting the passenger when they need to completely focused." The google car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over...while the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver."
Finally, driverless cars can help aid teenage drivers and teach them how to drive safer. Accidents among teenager has become a rising problem and the number is only growing. Driverless cars still require a driver so a teen would be perfect behind the wheel because they can get a feel of how a car should be driven. When it's time for them to take the wheel they will be able to show all they have been able to learn. " Special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel...but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills." Another example is driverless cars will make driver easier for teens since they don't have to be so stressed about driving. Driving is one of those tasks which takes time to master and the aid of the driverless car will allow a teen to learn how to drive safer and easier.
In conclusion, driverless cars are a develpment which will soon change the way driving is completed in everyday life. Driverless cars deserve their chance to hit the road as they come with many benefits. The driverless cars will be able to make roads safer and aid teenagers in developing good driving skills. Driverless cars in one way or another should be developed and made availble to own by the public. | 3 |
Cars have made an impression in human history. They have been used to get from point A to B for decades. They may help us but they also can hurt us. Gas emissions are hurting the environment and smog continues to grow. Some governments have already implimented ways to reduce these emissions. These have helped the problem and it may even be to our advantage. Many cities have already sought out ways to benefit the people that have chosen npt to use their cars. This limiting of car usage has benefited many countries and the trend seems to be catching on. In the first source, Elisabeth Rosenthal writes that it has made peope even happier than if they had had a car. It has also helped reduce traffic in normally busy streets. The most obvious benefit and advantage to having limited car usage is the fact that the reduced car use has reduced gas emissions. These many advantages may make, not using your car, worth your while.
Limiting car usage can be beneficial to the environment and it can also be beneficial to you. It can make for less stressed people. In Source 1, it describes how in a small town in Germany, many people are getting along fine without motor vehicles. As a matter of fact, some even said that they were happier without a car. Heidrun Walter states that "When I had a car i was always tense. I'm much happier this way." It may be less stressful because the goverment there had designed that town so that everything they could need was within walking distance or could be reched with public transportation. Many cities have already adopted this idea including New York. Source 3 has also asked people of their opinion and businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza said "It's a great opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." Carlos had said this while riding a two-seated bicycle with his wife. Walking, Hiking, and even bicycling have been generally seen as a way to destress and relax your tensions. Stepping away from the car and just walking may just be the stress reliever you needed.
A usual sight to see in busy cities and on main streets is the amount of cars that jam the street alway the way up during certain hours of the day. This can become increasingly annoying to some people that can be on their way to school or job. A car-free day has had a very succesul turn out in Bogota, Colombia. Source number 3 described the streets of the capital of Colombia to be "Eerily devoid of traffic jams." on that day. So many people might have participated because violators would be fined $25. This car-free day was intentionally placed to promote alternative transportations such as biking or public buses and to also reduce smog. Another example of a type of car limiting was seen in Paris, France. Paris was near a record amount of smog in the air with "147 micrograms of particulate matter (PM) per cubic meter compared with 114 in Brussels and 79.7 in London." - Source 2. Paris took action to try and reduce smog with this simple method: Leave cars with even-numbered license plates at home or face a $31 fine. They proceeded on to the next day with the same concept but this time instead of even-numbered plates, it was odd-numbered plates. This reduced congestion by 60 percent in the capital of France.
One of the more obvious advantages of limiting car usage is the amount of emission that can be prevented from not using your car. In Source 2 it is stated that after 5 days of limiting car usage "the smog cleared enough Monday for the ruling French party to rescing the ban for odd-numbered plates on Tuesday." After just five days of the imposed fines, gas emissions into the atmosphere was reduced significantly enough to lift the ban. If five days made such an impact it can also make a huge impact if many more people were to start limiting their car usage. Car usage has already been falling in the United States. In source 4 it states that "New York's new bike sharing program and its skyrocketing brdge and tunnel tolls reflect those new priorites, as do a proliferation of car-sharing programs across the nation." This is talking about how all these factors have come to reduce car sales and car usage in general. Less cars equals less gas which would then equal less air pollution.
In conclusion, there are many advantages to limiting your car usages. You may not only be helping the environment but you may also be helping yourself. Using your car less may even make you a less stressed individual. It has been shown to reduce congestions in busy streets. It has also helped reduce gas emission. Limited car usage has started a trend in many countries and may even be a trend here. It can give us these advantages and many more. | 4 |
Have you ever wanted to go on a trip and tour all over the ocean?
Well you can if you join the Seagoing Cowboys program, just like I did. It's an opportunity of a lifetime. "The cattle-boat trips were an unbelieveable opportunity for a small-town boy like me." I got to see amazing places. "Helping out on my aunt Katie's farm as a boy prepared me for hard work." Since I grew up on a farm I love working with horses, and helping people. I also found time to have fun on board.
One reason you should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program is that you get to travel to amazing places. Here's two places I traveled to when I was in the Seagoing Cowboys program, Europe and China.I also visited the
Acropolis in Greece, went on a gondola ride in Venice Italy, toured a excavated castle in Crete.
Another reason you should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program is because if you love horses, cows,or mules you get to work with them and take care of them all day. You will surely be kept busy, they have to be fed and watered two or three times a day. Bales of hay and bags of oats have to be pulled up frim the lower holds.
Working in the Seagoing Cowboys program is a lot of fun you even get time to hangout and relax. You get to travel cool places and work with animals. That's why I think you should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program. It's a one in a life time opportunity. | 3 |
Could you imagine everyone in the world driving in a vehicle that could control where and when you go somewhere? I think it would be absolute chaos. I couldn't imagine driving in a vehicle that could take control on it's own, It would be way to skeptical for me. I strongly disagree about driverless cars.
First, driverless cars are not 100% durable nor safe. Google cofounder, Sergey Brin, stated that "General motors created a concept car that would run on a special track". That track for these driverless cars were embedded with electrical cables that sent radio signals to the front of the car. In reality, no roads have any electrical currents running through them to make any car more secure. It's illegal in many states to even test computor cars because this company hasn't proved their car reliably safe. Driverless cars are in my opinion, not safe.
Secondly, in this whole artical, I didn't hear one thing about the driverless car being able to sense any size animal. Animals cause many accidents or deaths in the U.S. Animals are dangerous when you're driving, and many are unpredictable. This car has lots of little gagets and electronics in it, I think it should at least help you predict or let you know when a animal is approaching.
Lastly, weather is another big factor when you're trying to drive safely. Driverless car can't even predict when it's snowing, raining and such. When driving in dangerous weather and areas, it's very important to stay consistant, to stay calm, and to keep focused. Driverless cars dont have any emotions, they're not worried about the persons family waiting at home for them, or if the human in the car dies. Cars with a lot of technology have a better chance of screwing up, or something to go wrong with the vehicle.
To sum everything up, computor cars cannot be trusted. Driverless cars can't determine when animals are approaching nor can determine the weather or what the roads are like. "Traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at ALL times". Computors aren't meant to be in control of our lives or our loved ones lives. | 2 |
Driver good is very important for all people. In the united states' there are much car and this provoke much accidents in the life of the people. The president Obama's say: in the united states' greenhouse gas emissions, unveiled last week, will get a fortuitous assist from an incipient shift in american behavior: recent studies suggest that americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by.
In the united states peaked in 2005 and dropped steadily thereafter, according to an analysis by doug short of advisor perspectives, an investment research company. As april 2013 the nombers of miles driven per person was nearly 9 percent below the peak and equal to where the country was in January 1995. Part of the explanation certainly lies in the recession,because cash-strapped Americans could not afford new cars, and the unemployed weren't going to work anyway.''I think means something more fundamental is going on''.The transportation is the second largest source of Ameica's emissions, just behind power plants. But it could have negative implications for thr car industry. Diferent things are converging which suggest that we are witnessing a long -term cultural shift, said Mimi Sheller, a sociology professor at drexel university and director of its mobilities research and policy center. She cities various factors:the internet makes telecommuting possible feel more connected without driving to meet friends. The precident Obama is very good with the country because this words what he say ser very important for the all people and the world. | 0 |
Around the world we have been seeing trends of reducing automobile usage. Reducing automile usage would have a number of advantages but it must be approached in the right way. If the US were to attempt to "limit car usage" as the prompt states, the movement would undoubtedly recieve a lot of push back and would slow to a stop. Reducing car usage by building public transportation and smart suburbs would be ideal. This would cut down our co2 emissions and be reduce the number of car related injuries and deaths.
First, if there is one thing I know about American politics, its that political parties will oppose just about anything, no matter how advantageous or logical, "limiting car usage" is no exception, if the Democratic party were to suggest such a thing, it would create an upoar from the Republican and Libertarian parties. This would become more controversial than gun restrictions, we would have another surge of anti-environmentalism propoganda, Limbaugh would be spitting "tree-huggers" again, and more likely than not, our country would drift even further away from any sort of environmental solutions. Trying to limit car usage on a Federal level would be met by utter failure.
However, there is a right way to approach this issue in the US. If we were to ask for grants to build public transportation systems, encourage car-pooling, and build efficient bike paths, car usage could be significantly reduced.
The advantages of reducing our use of automobiles in the US are well worth the cost. Transportation is the second largest contributor of co2 emissions, just behind power plants. (Rosenthal, paragraph 34) Cutting these emissions, even by a fraction would have great benefits to our environment. David Goldburg, an official of Transportation for America states, "All of our development since World War 2 has been centered on the car, and that will have to change, how much you drive is as important as whether you have a hybrid." (7) The US has been moving towards a lower car use trend since the recession, "recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by" (29).
In summary, reducing automoblie use in the US should be a goal, but it cannot be approached through laws or restrictions. We can model our suburbs and cities to be more friendly to alternate transportations, and we can build public transportation systems across America. The reduction of co2 emissions from cars will curb our contribution to Global Climate Change and make a better future for generations to come. | 1 |
Facial expressions have been our way of communicating without talking. Its a silent way of showing how you feel about something or someone. Knowing what expressions are being shown towards an action you do is important. If you yell at someone, they might make an angry or upset face. After seeing that expression, most people will most likely never repeat that action again. In class rooms its hard sometimes as a teacher to teach and notice if everyone is catching along or if the subject is too boring. Having this new technology used to read students expressions is a valuable tool because it lets teachers know if they should continue or stop and help students out.
Many of us have been in the situation were your in class and it is boring. The class feels like 3 hours long and the teacher is into their subject and just does not stop talking. They do not switch things up and not many kids are paying any attention at all. With the help of this technology, which reads students facial expression, it can let teachers know its time to switch things up or move on.
The next class might be much easier to get through and maybe towards the end, be your favorite. Teachers and professors will see what students like best and what they find interesting and develope new and better strategies; or computors will just as Dr. Huang predicts in the 6th paragraph, "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human intructor.
Many students also struggle in school. " A classroom computor could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Students tend to try and be independent or just don't want to ask for help in fear of being made fun of. In some cases many students are confused but refuse to ask for help. With the detector, teachers could ask students if they need help or what they are not understand in class. All helping to prevent students from getting lost or struggling in any subject. Teachers could be doing a better job by understanding the students, and the students too,would feel better knowing that someone knows what they need help in and is coming up with a better teaching plan.
Technology is advancing more and more each day. In no time, we will improve schools and work areas. The way we communicate will better and the way we read expressions will too. As said in paragraph 8 "to an expert, faces don't lie: these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a "smiling" politician or celebrity isnt being truthful"; the same could be applied to students. Facial expressions are important. With these computors or devices put in every class room, students will soon be performing at their top best. Soon enought the decives will be used in work areas, while texting and more. | 3 |
The author makes a very valid point that caught me and kept me to his or her side. He or she stated that using the Facial Action Coding System (FACS) in a classroom could help improve the enviroment in the class. We've all had those lessons in school where we weren't quite getting it, or we had lost interest in the subject. The FACS could help us with this along with many other things that could turn valuable.
The Facial Action Coding System works by using all of the 44 major muscles in the human face. It is programmed to understand how those muscles work and what it means when those muscles move. Meaning, if I were to smile, the system would recognize that I'm happy and could continue on with the lesson. If I were to frown and look angry, the system would know that I'm unhappy and could find another route for me to learn the lesson.
With this technology, students don't have to worry about the lessons that they struggle with. This technology allows the computer to know their emotions and base their learning off of how they feel. If I don't understand a math problem on the computer and I have a confused look on my face, the computer analyzes my look and knows that I need more help. The computer knowing that allows me to get more help and understand the topic.
FACS doesn't just have to be in a learning facility. It could be at your work, someday your home, and even used for security purposes. When we place FACS in some sort of work place, like an office. An office can get a little tense and stressful. With the knowledge in FACS, the computers used can realize that the user is under a lot of stress and might need a break. We could also use it for facial recognition in security cameras, laptops, desktops, even phones. And with the possibility of one day putting such technology in a home, it's crazy! Not only could you work on house work, but any other school work with FACS!
The possibilities are pretty endless with FACS. The ideas go on and on with this type of technology, and I fully support this author and what he or she is trying to do. | 3 |
Do you think driverless cars would become a problem? Well i think they would and i will be giving you some reasons why it would become a problem. First i will talk about lawsuits. Second i will talk about how it would affect the law. Last i will talk how it will hurt mechanics jobs.
Driverless cars is a bad idea because of many reasons. First i will start by conflict with the owner and the company. Whose fault would it be if the owner got into and accident would it be the companys fault because they said the car is driverless? All i see is that it would cause great conflict. There probaly would be a lot of lawsuits against the companys.
Another reason driverless cars would be bad is cause they would have to change the law. How could they give the owner a speeding ticket if they wern't even driving? would the car be set to go a certain speed and if it was how would the car know what the speed limit was? I can just see that becoming a big problem. Also i can see people thinking it would be okay to text an drive because its not like there driving anyways. Would it be okay to text and drive? How would anyone feel safe? What happens if the car was to have malfunction and cause a car pile up all because people were to lazy just to drive!
Another problem would be how would mechanics make there money a lot of people would lose there job over it. Would the goverment require a degree to work on these cars? It wouldn't be fair to the people who went to school to become a mechanic and then these self driving cars come out
that would be basically ran off a computer. Those mechanic would have basically payed thousands of dollars for no reason.
Now do you think driverless cars would become a problem? There would be a lot of lawsuits because of driverless cars. The goverment would have to change the law. Last mechanics would lose there jobs. So in all realitty in my opinion driverless cars would become a huge problem, | 2 |
Planets can be twins? Venus is known as Eath's twin. At one time Venus was the closest to Earth, but has grown to become less and less like Earth over the years. Therefore Venus is getting more and more dangest to study as the years go on.
Venus is very important to study. Venus is the closest planet to Earth in density and in size. Sometimes in distance too. Depending on what time of the year it is, due to plantet orbiting around the Sun, will depend on if Venus or Mars is closer to Earth.
Venus is difficult to study because of how dangest it is. Almost 97 percent of Venus is carbon dioxide. Clouds of highly corresive sulfuric acid are in Venus' atmosphere. The pressure on Venus is 90 times the pressure on Earth. Venus is the hottest planet in the solar system, even though Mercury is closer than Venus to the Sun. Venus has an average of 800 degrees Fahrenheit. The conditons on Venus are far more extreme than conditions on Earth.
Due to all the changing features Venus has had over the years. Venus still has some things like Earth. Some familiar features are valleys, mountains, and craters. The changing has caused no spaceship to touch down on Venus in more than three decades. No spacecraft has ever survived the landing more than a few hours.
This proves how the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit, but is very dangest. Venus is important to study because it is Earth's "twin." This shows how Venus is dangest. Venus is challenging to study, but is worth the danger. | 1 |
having limiting car usage in this world wil be saveing yourself some great deal of money also save money for the system for instance many expect public transport serving the suburds to play a larg role in a six-year federal transportion bill als one of the places for limited cars is apart in paris suggested that on monday mortorists with even numbered license plates are ordered to leave there vechlies at there home or get punish with a fine of 31$ the same thing will apply to odd plates the next day. studies shows that 4,000 people with cars had theire car impounded with a high fine plus tax in bogota cars have beeb banned with only buses and taxies are the only two transpotion are allwoed studies showed that fewer of americans are getting cars and driving less even lees and less people are getting licenses year by year studies are now pointing is americans passed peaking point? thats is still uncertain for now,some places in new york shows that bike sharing programs and ints shyrocketing bridge and tunnels tolls reflected thode new priorities as they do prolifered of cars sharing the same programs across the nation and we do see a high percentage of it droping down like apples. reaches showed that they found that young people that are driving decreased of by 23 percent since the year of 01 to 09 in an article i read showed that moblie world last year in oversees sports suggiested a business plan in a world in which vehicles ownership is impractical and public transporation save the system more money and lower the risk of danger. | 0 |
There are both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars. I believe driverless cars should not be developed. There are more negative aspects than positive aspects when it comes to driverless cars, in my opinion. There are many reasons why I think that driverless cars should not be produced. Driverless cars aren't completely driverless, they're expensive, unsafe, and technology could fail and cause fatal accidents and law suits against the maufacturers of these driverless cars.
Driverless cars are not completely driverless. When using a driverless car, you must keep your hands on the steering wheel. The car can't drive by itself through work zones or traffic. The driver has to remain alert, just as if they were in a manual driving vehicle. There's no purpose whatsoever, to have created these driverless cars if they aren't much different from a regular vehicle. The main difference is the cost of the driverless car versus the cost of a manual driving vehicle.
It costs too much to make and prepare roads for these driverless cars. They created smart roads that the cars could run on. The smart-road systems worked well, but there's not enough money to rebuild all of the roads in the world, or even in America. All roads would have to be upgraded, and that's highly expensive. Driverless cars still can't be bought, but when they come out to the public there will be a significant difference in cost between manual driving vehicles and these driverless cars. It's simply not worth your money.
There are multiple reasons why these driverless cars are unsafe. They could fail, and fatal accidents could occur. That would be a problem. With the driverless car, safety is not promised at all. The driver has to be completely alert. There could still be complications with the car when the driver has their eyes on the road. The car could malfunction and you would have no way of stopping the self-driving vehicle. It's dangerous, and this is why it's illegal in most states to even test these driverless cars. If the technology fails and someone is injured, there could be one of two causes---either the manufacturer or the driver. Law suits would definitely be filed if someone was injured while in the driverless car when technology was not reliable.
I am against the development of these cars. They're definitely not safe. They're not 100% driverless, and the technology is not reliable.
The negative aspects outweigh the few positive aspects. I believe that developing these cars for public, every day use, would be tragic. It would be the wrong decision, mostly for safety issues. I go against the development of these unreliable, driveless cars. | 3 |
The Seagoing Cowboys
I think more people should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program because it's a chance to experience new things, see unique places, and meet many new people. Being in the Seagoing Cowboys program could open up your eyes to new and exciting things. It's a great opportunity to become a Seagoing Cowboy.
Being part of the Seagoing Cowboys, you can have lots of fun. You can find unique ways to spend your time, because the Seagoing Cowboys have to go on some pretty long trips. But, you can also go sight-seeing, and see wonderful things. You can also get a chance to help out people who really need it, and it feels great to give to other people. It opened up the world for some people. It makes you more aware of people of other countries and their needs. There will be lots of other people on board too, so you can also get a chance to socialize with them, and become great friends. When you can find time to have fun on board, you can play games such as baseball, volleyball, fencing, boxing, reading, and whittling. You can even have a table-tennis tournament, and many more other types of games. It's sure to make it feel like time is going by quicker.
It's not all fun and games, though. You also will have to care for the animals. You must make sure you feed and water them two or three times a day. You need to make sure that you will also have enough food and water for the animals, and the people on board. You have to make sure the animals' stalls are clean, too. But, doing this can also keep you busy, and if you like to care for animals, then this could also be very fun. You will have to try and stay safe too, and make sure other people on board are safe, as well. Just try not to fall off the cattle boat. It's not that hard. You will have to be extra careful if you have to serve as a night watchman. You will have to check on all the animals every hour and report to the captain.
While you travel the sea, you can get a chance to go touring in the places. You can get a chance to take a gondola ride in Venice, Italy, which is a city with streets of water. You can tour an excavated castle in Crete, and maybe pass by the Panama Canal. There's a lot of opportunities to see many cool and unique things as part of the Seagoing Cowboys. It's a trip you're sure to never ever forget.
These are all my reasons of why I believe more people should join the Seagoing Cowboys. It's a lot of work, but it's worth it. Being a part of the Seagoing Cowboys, is much more than just an adventure. | 4 |
After reading the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile", I think that this use of technology could indeed be very useful and valuable.I'm sure not everyone would like a computer screen detecting their emotions,but I'm also sure that not everyone knows how helpful they could really be. With that being said,continue reading my claim on why I think this new technology could be very valueable.
In this article, the author describes the computer model and our muscle movements. It taught me how much of a help our muscle movements truly are.At first, I wasn't exactly sure that the Facial Action Coding System would be a good idea,but as I kept reading I definitely changed my mind. In a classroom, not every student is going to like the idea of a computer detecting their emotions,but it could truly be a big help and be a good impact on the students. As the article states, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,then it could modify the lesson,like an effective human instructor." That makes a job for a teacher so much easier. Technology is becoming a huge part in our lives,might as well make it more effective.Not only does it help a teacher,but it also assists the students with better lessons.Think about it, if you're doing a reading lesson and you just hate the passage you're reading, the computer could detect the drowsiness that you'll probably have on your face and could improve it by giving you a new passage to read. This makes students more active during school,which means students will be getting better grades. It's a win-win for everyone. Also, the Facial Action Coding System could even make you happy. The article states a drama coach tried this with her actors, and "putting on a happy face" would actually work. It also helped with creating emotion on stage.
In conclusion, the Facial Action Coding System, is valuable in many ways for students.It's helpful in not only their lessons throughout the day, but their overall grades. It also helps out teachers too! So after reading "Making Mona Lisa Smile", it really brightened my mind about having a program such as FACS to our school cooperation. | 2 |
Dear Senator,
I feel that we should change using the Electoral college. The popular vote is much more effective. Using the popular vote to decide who becomes president would show who the citizens of the united states want. The popular vote shows what each state has voted for, using the Electoral college takes the right away for the people being able to vote for the president that they favor. Instead of using what the people voted for they come together to chose the candidate they predict would be the best and do the most for the country and that's not fair. If voting is important to this country then congress should understand that when the poeple vote for something everyone wants it to be their decisions that makes one of the two canidates become president not who the Electoral college believes would be best. If we could overcome the debate between what process works better more people might vote.
Although some citizens believe that the Electoral college is a good idea. I feel that if they compared not having the electoral college and only using the popular vote durning voting periods they would feel they system is more effisent. One example is big states could make a tremdous impact on which canidate wins the electon. These states have more people with more opinions that should be used durning the time of the electon for the president.
Some of the problems with the Electoral college is not only do voters not vote for their president, Back in 1960 " The Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Deomcratic electors with new electors who opposed John F. Kennedy ( So that a popular vote for Kennedy would not have actually gone to Kennedy)". "In that same vein, faithless electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please" That is not what we are promised as a country. It states that the electoral college is suppose to cast a vote on what their state wants and what their state has chosen. That year the right to do so was taken away. Voting is a serious matter. Popular vote would clearifiy what each states popular favor is, who they want, and which candidate their vote was to be casted for.
I hope with all the information that I have just provided you with above will help to show you that the popular vote isn't only what most people want it's also the better choice. | 3 |
Driverless cars seem like they would take over the future in about the next twenty years. When in reality technology is not pregressing as quickly as you think.
Driverless cars would cause chaos in the world. Causing problems the car salesman would not even mention to you. Heres why they would be bad for society.
When people think of this idea of driverless cars they think finally the future has come upon us for once and for all. As stated in the article driverless cars could malfunction and legally the manufacturer would be to blame.All drivers would have to take caution and be aware of there surroundings everywhere they went. Drivers everywhere would have to be alert and furthermore, know that everytime they get into there driverless vehichle that there are risks. The accidents are just one factor there are many others.
Driverless cars are said to have a feature where the human or driver is alerted to know when to take over. This feature on the car could not be as safe as we are blinded to believe. What if the car does not alert the person fast enough.In that case that would cause lots of problems for everyone who has a driverless cars. I learned from the article that the car does not know how to avoid traffic stops or work zones. That would mean the driver would have to step up and take over for the time being. The article states that they are still working on the type of signaling that it would want to include. I'm sure they would try to find the safest one possible. On a 55 mph freeway would the driver be alerted fast enough to take over ? This question troubles me because what if the vehicle does not stop and the person ignores the signaling.
As expressed in the article the auther questiones whether
the driver would simply get bored with the car being driverless. This made me take on this topic in a different perspective.While the car being driverless maybe fun but overtime it would get boring mainly because you are not doing anything. The sensors say your hands have to be on the wheel at all time but would that really make them driverless. Mishaps as such as falling alseep would be things manufacturers would be things they would have to look into.
In conclusion , i think that overall the driverless cars idea is a really bad for lots of reasons as i explained in my earlier paragraphs. Anyone looking for a more futuristic feature to their car shoud get one. | 3 |
The face on Mars can be explained many ways. Some ways may be that it was aliens. Some may say that it is just a unusual natural formation. There is no dought in my mind that it is a natural formation. There are many ways to explain that it is a natural formation.
First, here on earth we have many natural formations that stand out and have plenty of explanation behind it. One of them could be the dunes in the sahara. I am going to compare this to the face on Mars because wind can move sand, dirt, and dust. The wind could have shaped the pace on mars. Erotion could have played a big key in this too. The rock could have eroded from the dirt and sand rubbing against it. Even a metior from a long time ago could have shaped the face. Yes it is odd but if you see in the 19776 photo it is pretty well shaped so it had to be made by aleins around that time. Then look at the 2001 picture and it is eroded and not shaped like the other one. It is just a process planets go through and even earth goes through.
Secondly, the clouds and the camera could have made a little change in the look of it. It most likely is the camera from Viking 1. Nasa even said in paragraph 8 that they couldn't get a clean shot of it through the red clouds. Some may argue that with such an old camera how did Viking 1 get a really nice shot of it. Well that is a good point but it might have occured in that time era because it was in a nice condition to our pictures. Did you ever think though that it is just a rock that probably has alot of sand on it. Look at the 2001 picture, it is in an oval-square like shape. But look at the top of it. It looks like the wind has shaped dunes over the rock. And since the sand has moved it doesn't have the eyes and the perfect shape anymore. Viking 1 had a old type of camera on it. Today we have outstanding cameras and technology and we don't see the face anymore. Which one would you trust, the antique camera hundreds of millions of miles away, or next generation cameras?
Last but not least, it could be a rise in lava or underground material. Mars has the same inner layers as earth so don't you think it could be techtonic plate activity. An earthquake could cause an uprise in crust and rock. In paragraph 12 Jim Garvin, chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program, said that it reminded him of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. It could be a lava dome on Mars; however goes back to techtonic plate activity.
There alot of ifs, ands, or buts in this conversation. I am not saying that there was never life on Mars or there is no life in the universe but us, I am saying that it was most likely caused by natural causes. It could very well be that it was created by water or an ocean. The Mars face was created by natural causes. | 3 |
Limiting the car usage can have multi advantages for everysingle citizen. reducing car usage can help citizens to live a better life,which mean it can make them happier,healthier and more sociable. for example heidrun walter says "when i had a car i was always tense. i'm much happier this way."this show the effects of limiting the car usage." after days of near-record pollution,paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city.''goverments are now being concius on how cars can affect us todays but, more in a future about pollution. ''the smog rivaled beijing,china, which is know as one of the most polluted cities in the world.'' the cause for this problem are cars. in beijing,china, citizens and tourist are having problems to breath and the smog is causin health problems too.''its a good opportunity to take aways stress and lower the air pollution,''in bogota colombia another citizen name carlos arturo talk about how the reduce of car usage have taken ways the stressand helps to lower the air pollution which is going to help our kids ain a future to have a better life. another important fact is that is car usage is that citizens would have to walk or exercise by using bicycle or other methods to move around the citie which the effect could be everybody having healthier lifeand have a better social life wich in some cases helps the person to be able to be themselves.
i think people should be concius and start reducing their car usage becasue is only for theis benefit but for other or even something more importantr their families. car companies are going to be affected by this change. but their going to be more affective in a future when they see what they have done. not only for the human race but for theis loved members. so i think the advantages of limiting tha car usage is good in many ways but their still one factor is going to bother people like going to some places really far away to see some of theirs family members. | 2 |
Have you ever heard of the Seagoing Cowboys program. You should join because you get to travel all over the world and you get to help people in other countries. It is a really unique program, with very fun games along the trip.
The first reason you should the Seagoing Cowboy program is because you can travel over the world and go on many adventures. You get to see things you never saw before and do things you never done before. In the text it says, you can see Europe and China. Also, you can visit Greece. The second reason you should join is because you get to help people around the world. In the text it says, it makes ypu aware of other countries needs.
In conclusion, you should join the program. If you think you shouldn't that wrong because you have a bunch of amazing opportunitys. It is a very fun and unique kind of program. So, you should consider joining. They also play fun games like volleyball, baseball, table-tennis,fencing,and boxing. | 1 |
The electoral college is a process that has been used since the first president was elected. Now it is being questioned as a rational way to elect the next presidents. The author of the article "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong", Bradford Plumer, argues that the electoral college is unfair and outdated, while the author of the artcle "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the president", Richard A. Posner, gives five reasons to why we should keep the electoral college. Though the method of electing a president is refered to as a "non-democratic method" it is an extremely important way to decide our nation's president.
Of course there are reasons why the electoral college should be abolished. Plumer argues, "the Louisiana legislature nearly succeedeed in replacing the democratic electors with new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy." Because of the replacement the popular wouldn't have gone to Kennedy. Plumer continues to state that "Electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please..." That means the opposing party gets the electoral vote because of the "faithless" electors. It understandable why the electoral college should be abolished; it is unreliable and unfair. However, we cannot abolish the only logical and reasonable way of electing our persidents.
It is important to note that | 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.