full_text stringlengths 737 20.5k | score int64 0 5 |
|---|---|
Hello my name is STUDENT_NAME, and today i will be talking about driveless carsa and my side to it.
I'm just here to say that i hope nobody gets offended by anything i say and i truly dont care about other peoples opinions over a car.
We should start off buy saying that i cant see every manufacturer having a driveless car. Although it would be cool to see how it would turn out.
So i think that driveless cars should be created because of them nights you go to the bar and dont have a way to get home other then driving.
although you cant do that because of the fact you would be driving impaired and its illegal.
So if there was a driveless car you could just hop in start it up and go home. Also it would be alot easier for kids to take over if there mom was about to faint or something.
Now think about all crashes that happen daily.
Did you know that every 125 seconds theres an accident on the roads in the U.S.
So if there driveless cars this wouldnt be happening because then we couldnt be on the phone and driving and other relative things like that.
So i know this next part might sound bad to the manufacturer but they could make alot of money, also lose money at times.
The reason i say that is because if we get in a wreck then it would be the manufacture fault.
Lastly think about all the laws would be avoided.
Such as being on the phone while driving.
You couldnt drive while being impaired. You would never be speeding. There also wouldnt be as much road rage. There wouldnt be a need for seatbelts. It would be so much easier on all of our lives.
These are the reasons i beleive that driveless cars should be invented.
I gave my reasons now id love to hear the reasons why they shouldnt be invented.
Its a very good idea you should take it your guys advantages. I mean thnk about all the old people that dont wanna drive and rather reasons to not driving. Thats all for now cant wait to hear if they ever get invented. | 2 |
Hi im Luke. Are you interested on joining the Seagoing Cowboys program. What is that said the man in the blue shirt working at his farm. It's a program were we help ship animals across the world. We have sign ups on friday stop by if you want.
Well did you get anyone said the head of the Seagoing Cowboys. We have a total of twenty people so far taht said they were. Finally we have people because if were going to go across seas to help ship animals we will need alot more people. Where is our next place over seas. It's in Europe and they have a big hawl. I can't wait I said.
On friday there was about 20 people that said they were coming on the sign up sheet and we were already ready for them to come in and listen for our experince with the Seagoing Cowboys. Then when it came time all of them came right in and sat down, so it was my que. Thank you for coming everyone. Today I will be talking about my experiance with the Seagoing Coboys and how I think it's the best thing that ever happend to me. First of I just graduated from highschool and then I got invited to this trip over seas on a cattle boat, and I knew that I would never do that in my life so I said yes. Then when we got over seas I got involved with this program, and my job was to keep everything at night going good. This would include the ship and the animals. But, one night it was very stormy and I slipped and hit the side of the boat and broke many ribs. Which stopped me for doing anything for the next couple of days.
But, there were other fun things to see and to do accros the sea. Like baseball and volleyball because when the ship was unloaded there was alot of free space. Also, when you were shipping things you got to see alot of cool and exiting places. But, my favorite part was having the experiance to do things over seas and working with animals, and our next hawl is Europe so sign up now! | 1 |
In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming, the author presents first the positive then he presents the features that are designed to be the negative.
The Positive outweight the positive in a sence of accomplishment. So people take more into acount of what they could accomplich
instead of having to be physically driving their car, and not think about what a bad idea such thing would imply. the author first state the year the design was made then he gave readers the automatic function of the car and finally he gave the detail features that would not allow the driver to just completly be separate from the car "In 2013...the car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but speacial touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel" (paragraph 7).
Proponent for completly driverless cars would state only the positive while leaving out that if the car for exemple were to malfunction then there would be no drivers to steer it back in control and the lives of the civilians would be put in danger. Most level headed peope however are aponents of such an idea as a completly driverless car. Most people would not willingly put their lives in the handle of a machine not directed by a human hand. people shoud be wary of such a unassisted technology.
Throughout the article the author persistantly bambarde readers with the more positive aproche of having a driverless car then following it up on how the manufacturers are trying to protect human lives by not allowing the car to be completly driverless. Most people should take into account of what they're in for before buying the opions of a bias source. Not to be a ludite but, human beings should be in control of their own lives and not let a piece of machinery handle it for them. They should be cautious of the dangers of having an unassisted machines, even if the government said it was safe, so that when something does go wrong they can not blame anything on another. | 2 |
Cars play a huge role in our lives. It is the most easy and common way of transportation. In some parts of the U.S.,you can drive a car even if you're 15. Before cars weren't invented,people used bicycles,subways,roller skates,busses....
If you want to go to somewhere by bike,it is gonna take much more time than it takes by car. That's why people prefer driving cars insted of riding bikes or using subway. However,there are some disadventages of driving car. Air pollution is one of them. Our world is getting dirtier every day and it's under risk. The glaciers are melting and the animals who live in the north pole are dying. The people who are aware of this,don't drive cars and protest it. In the article"In German Suburb,Life Goes On Without Cars", Elisabeth Rosenthal says "Street parking,driveways and home garages are generally forbidden in this experimental new district on the outskirts of Freiburg,near the French and Swiss borders. Vuban's streets are completely 'car-free'-except the main thoroughfare,where the tram to downtown Freiburg runs,and a few streets on one edge of the community. As a result,70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars,and 57 percent sold a car to move here. Vauban,completed in 2006,is an example of a growing trend in Europe,the United States and elsewhere to seperate suburban life from auto use,as a component of a movement called'smart planning.'""I think,the intention to forbid the car usage is to divert people to drive bycyles or subway other than driving cars. The other disadvenatge is ;cars make us lazy. Before cars weren't invented people walked. People are gaining weight of not w
In the article"The End Of Car Culture" Elisabeth Rosenthal says:But America's love affair with its vehicles seems to be cooling. When adjusted for population growth,the number of miles driven in the United States peaked in 2005 and dropped steadily thereafter,according to an analysis by Doug Short of Advisor Perspectives,an ivestment 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. A study last year found that driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009...." Also in the article:"Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota"the author,Andrew Selsky says:"In a program that's set to spread to other countries,millions of Colombians hiked,biked,skated or took buses to work during a car-free day yesterday,leaving the streets of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams."
In my old school,some group of environmentalists showed us a video of how our world is going to be if we use cars to transport everyday. It really affected me and my friends. | 2 |
In VAUBAN, Germany, people walk from place to place without cars with no trouble. Why cant you? Street parking, driveways and home garages are most likely banned in the new district on the outskirts of Freidburg, near the french and swiss borders. This concept of limiting car usage is a great idea! Why not walk somewhere if it's close by, you will be doing everyone a favor by not polluting the earth.
Pollution is terrible, so why use your car if its hurting our precious Earth? Paris enforced a temporary ban on motor vehicles due to the near-record pollution. According to, Paris bans driving due to smog, ''On monday motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine ($31). Almost 4,000 drivers were fined, 27 people had their cars impounded for their reaction to the fine.'' In other words, Paris had an almost record breaking smog because of motor vehicles so they put a ban on cars for $31. I think that putting a ban on cars for less pollution is excellant. This excerpt from, In german suburb , life goes on without cars, ''Diesel fuel was blamed, since france has a tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline. Diesels make up 67 percent of vehicles in france, compared to a 53.3 percent average of diesel engines in the rest of Western Europe, according to Reuters.'' This means, since diesel is favored over in france, it was blamed for causing the smog. Cars are to blame for causing pollution to our Earth, so why use cars. We must limit car usage.
BOGOTA, Columbia had the same idea, in a program thats set to spread to other countries world wide. Apparently, '' Millions of Columbians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during a car-free day, leaving the streets of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams.'' I agree that ignoring your cars to hike, bike, or skate lets you interact with more people. You also have more experiences with other things you have never tried before. according to the article, ''The day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in Bogota in the mid-1990s. It has seen the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths, the most of any latin american city, according to mockus, the city's mayor.'' This states that since the 1990s, Bogota has been running a campaign to limit car usage, to help out the pollution problem, by building 118 bicycle path ways to get more and more people to use bicycles over motor-vehicles.
The day when cars are limited is the day I pray for. Why should the Earth suffer for our laziness of using a car instead of walking there. The pollution has gotten out of control and we need to put a stop to it. Please help out by limiting your car usage, for the sake of the Earth. | 2 |
Dear Senator I am not in favor of keeping the Electoral College. We should not keep the Electoral College for many reasons. Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO all agreed on one thing, and it was abolishing the Electoral College. Another reason being, under the Electoral College System, voters vote for a slate of electors, not the president and in return they select the president. Last but not least, the Electoral College is unfair to voters.
Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO all agreed on one thing, and it was aboloshing the Electoral College. This was also agreed upon by many other citizens. According to a Gallup Poll in 2000, which was taken shortly after Al Gore won the popular vote, but lost the popular vote. According to the poll "over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election not the kind we have now." It is said that "this year voters are to expect another close election in which the popular vote winner could again loose the presidency."
Under the Electoral College System, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in return elect the president. Because of this there are so many questions asked that are answered very broadly due to the fact you do not really know the correct answer. For instace, who are the electors? They can be anyone not holding the public office. Who picks the electors in the first place? It depends on the state. Sometimes state conventions, Sometimes the State Party's central comittee, and sometimes the presidential canidates themselves.
Man oh man is the Electoral College unfair to voters! This may be an opinion, but it is on of many citizens who are all in agreement of it." All of the "winner-takes-all" systems in each state, canidates do not spend time in each states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states." In fact in the 2000 campaing there were seventeen states the did not see the canidates at all and it was said that voters in 25 of the largest media markets did not even get to see a single campaign ad. " if anyone has a good arguement for putting he fate of the presidency in the hands of a few swing voters in ohio, they have yet to make it...."
As you can see I am in favor of changing the elctoral college to election by popular vote for the president of the United States of America. Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO all agreed on one thing, and it was aboloshing the Electoral College. Under the Electoral College System they vote not for the president but for a state of electors who in return elect the president. Last but not least, the Electoral College is just unfair in so many differnt ways. These are reasons why I am not in favor of the Electoral College but in the favor to elect by popular vote for the president of the United States of America. | 3 |
The author actually supports this idea that venus is worthy to pursuit despite the dangers it presents very well. They do give us some information that may make us think its dangerous but he give us more information that supports his claim. In the passage the author talks about how Venus is very much like earth. It states that "Often refered to as earths twin venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size,and occasionally the closest in distance too"This shows how the author believes that Venus is like earth and if it is it means that was the authors suggests is very true.
Despite some dagerous things in venus there was also beauitiful things. In the passsage it states 'Long ago Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life just like earth" .This sentence explains to us the wonders of that Venus may have been that shows us and makes us see that venus had beautiful places and they had nothing to do with danger. Although yes Venus may not be safe now it was safe long ago. People who would have studided it before were not in danger because Venus was very much like earth. If venus is like earth than it is not dangerous because earth is not dangerous. In the passage it also states "Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on earth. The planet had a surface to rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys,mountains,and craters". This statment explains to us the safe things venus has because mountains and and valleys and craters arent meant to be dangerous they are meant to be a place where people can go and study and see the beauties of the planets.
The Author does do a very good job suggesting what he believes. There is no doubt that Venus would be an amazing place to pursuit despite all the dangers. Some examples of why it is a good place to pursuit are it state in the passage" venus can sometimes be our nearest option for plantary visit,a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel"This is saying that Alot of people love to pursuit earth so why not venus if its the next closest thing to earth. It would be good to pursuit beause there can be new features that can be found there may be life over there that we may not know about and if people would pursuit studying venus they can be the ones to find out further things about venus. Thats why stdying venus is worthy to pursuit because you can find very interesting things. There are more better things than dangerous things it outbeats it .All this evidence from the text is showing what the author suggests about venus and how it is very much true and he gives very good expmples of that and how he supports this idea very much. | 2 |
I think this claim would be very usefull in a students environment. The resone I feel as why this facial action coding system would do well in schools is because. The student mind is very fragial and kids might be sad from being bullied and might not express how they feel. With this type of technaloge school can lower the risks of suicides or school shooting by trying to help the child in any way they can. And also can stop kids that bully eachother or can even provent harmful perents at the childs home. It is sad to hear that one of your fello class mates has just commeted suicide. And me of all SCHOOL_NAME students should know how that feels and if there was something that have could provented that I would have done everything in my will to. one of my close friends dies 1/1/2018 from commeting suicide #lilpesoworld #neverforgotten #alwaysinourhearts | 1 |
Using tecnology to read the emotional expressions in a classroom is valuable because we could truly obtain information in the classroom. Using a computer can display what is being shown in the minds of the future generations.
Altering computers with this new technology could prevent students from ever falling asleep while studying, or taking a text. This is because computers could alter the way they process information, to fit the needs of the one that is using it. Dr. Huang says.. " A classroom compter could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored.".." Then it could modify the lesson , like an effective human instructor." Doing this could improve grades, and up the positive emotions in a classroom environment. According to the Facial feedback Theory of Emotion, "Moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them." Using this science, we could alter the way we view things, and even maniulate people into having an emotion you want them to have at that point in time.
Emotions being read by technology, coud potentially be better for our society. Looking at something you enjoy is better than constantly being frusturated while looking at the same ad over and over. Using this , we could further enhance our abilities in the classroom. | 2 |
It sounds great to live a life where cars drive themself. Just imagine all you have to do is turn it on and off and that's it. What a scientific advancement it would be to have a mechine be able to respone while moving like humans do on the daily. It's probably hard for you to believe in a world like this, but honestly humans aren't far from having this belief into reality.
Google has already had cars that can drive on their own if the conditions never changes. Like, if there were no accidents, word works, parking in and going out of driveways, and other complicated traffic issues. So far, humans are the only ones to be able to think rational if something new happens on the roads; which something new could happen any day.
Another way of making driverless cars is by making smarter roads. In the late 1950s, General Motors created a car that could on a special test track. The roads had electrical cables that would send radio signals to a receiver on the front end of the car. Also, an engineering team at Berkeley tired something similar to smart roads by using magnets with alternating polarity.The only down side to these ideas are it's required massive upgrades to existing road, making this idea way to expensive
An argument to the idea of driverless cars is it's has to much of a risk factory of someone being injuried. If we take step to make sure it has the ablity to perform like a humans does to every roadblocker that we lie ahead of them; then it should be able to be use. I believe it would be a great idea to have such cars. Also, i believe it will be soon that humans discover the way of doing this. | 2 |
You are not the only one who believes that the "Face on Mars" is real. Many people around the world have believed that the image we released of the huge rock formation, which resembles a human head formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and a mouth is in fact a face, but they are wrong.
I was one of the men on Michael Malin's Mars Orbiter Camera team and I took a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos that were released. The pictures clearly showed that the "Face on Mars" was a natural landform and not an alien monument after all.
Some people still believed that there was a Face and the reason that it looked like a natural landform and not a face was because it was winter where the Face was located and it was a cloudy time of year on the Red Planet. The camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the Face and they thought that the alien markings were hidden in the haze. On April 8, 2001 the Mars Global Surveryor came close enoough for a second look and this time it was a cloudless summer day.
My team captured an amazing picture using the camera's absolute maximum resolution. Each pixel in the image spans 1.56 meters, compared ot 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking picture. What the picture acually showed was the Martian equivalent of a butte of mesa, which are landforms common around the American West. | 2 |
Yes, the use of this technology is very valuable in many ways. The technology can detect how you are feeling, in the passage it tells you that the computer can tell if a human is mad, happy, sad, worried, etc.
This technology can be very useful to techers as well as anyone else. If a student is feeling a lot of emotion and trying to do school work, they will be more focused on what they were feeling instead of the work the teacher has given him/her. It can also help the teacher to know how exactly to act twards a student. For example, if a student is feeling 75% sad they are most likely going to cry. If a student is about to cry and teacher starts yeling at them for not paying attention, because the student isn't feeling like themselves that day its going to trigger the students brain to make them cry.
In conclusion, this tehcnology in my opinion should most defiently be used in schools. Not only to help the teachers out, but for the stundents themelves. I think that if we use this technology it will increase focuse on school work will improve moods, and increase better grades and testing scores. | 2 |
Having th advantage of source the population with no more cars is what i would have done. With more people driveing behind the wheel what would happen next if you step on that road to get across while a person is driving behind th wheel over 90 miles an hour. In the U.S. there are people dying of accidents drunk driveing traffic and so much more that you dont know of. How much more will suffer if a love one is dead lying there on the ground in front of your eyes in tears beacuse that person was killed by a non licesend driver.
Its rough trying too get scool in the morning know what will happen when that person is behind the wheel. A deer might jump in the way while it just got done eating its meal. Scary is what i will say it really is when you are in a situation like that once in your life.
People need tranportation in this world to get to places all around. From here to there traveling in AC while in the heat on a hot day or keeping warm with the heater on a icy but cold day. If i have a job i need a car to get there to work while I make a living to put food on the table for you and our family. Hard it is with and without a vehicle but people still made it through with or without a vehicle. In my life my parents need a vehicle to get to work on time and need it to get home from a hards day at work.
To others its a dumb but a smart or nosmart thing to do but my opion is in between its a hard thing to agree on. Cars a effecting our population with death of people and gas and fuel that is blowing out of the rough with expenses. Prices that is excending to others minds is that is becomeing higher thatn i can ever imagine it comes and goes like in a blink of an eye you would even think it was gone until somebody told you it was. | 0 |
Seagoing cowboys program is a once in a life time opportunity you get to explore different parts of the world. If you like animals and always wanted to travel the world well this is your channce trust me hi my name is Luke Bomberger i have been to many cuntries China,italy, New Orleans,Europe,Rome italy,panama canals.
You might as well get to see more places than i did think about all the places you will get to go to. Get to explore the Atlantic ocean, the Pacific ocean. It will be like a vacation for you but way more exiting that also includes some dagerous moments i was once the noight watchman i slid down a slippery ladder on my backside. My heart raced as i shot feet first toward and opening on the side of the ship. A small strip of metal along the edge stopped me from slidding,keeping me from flying overboard into the dark antlantic ocean.
Every job has its risks but its very fun you get to see the ocean and the stars at night the moon glowing and the ocean reflecting its beutiful light. hope to see you here at the seagoing cowboy program. | 1 |
As our atmosphere constantly changes, so do our habits. With greenhouse emissions rising, our efforts towards changing it are too. Even outside of the United States there are efforts being made; in Germany, France, and Colombia. In Gernamy, some people have ended up selling their cars, and started living a whole new lifestyle. Moved into car-less communities with others, and now live supposedly happier lives. A city in Columbia, officially has a car free day, to try and cut down on emissions and help reduce the stress of driving, also those who do not go along with it are fined. So, maybe life with less cars can actually be beneficial to many of us.
In the city of Vauban, Germany there is a suburb that was finished around 2006. Its goal was to limit the use of cars. So far it seems successful in its purpose; where 70% of the families living there do not have cars, and at least 57% sold a car to live in that suburb. For the most part, there is no driveways, garages, or street parking so it is mainly car-free except for the "main thoroughfare" being the tram to downtown. Proof that not only the idea was beneficial, but it was also "inspirational" is that places like Vauban, are growing more and more in Europe, and the U.S. has the EPA (Evironmental Protection Agency) promoting these car reduced communities, and legislators are now starting to act upon it. It is also becoming a part of a movement called "smart planning". The idea also is to make cities denser so more people can live, and easier for walking. To make things closer, so getting there is not such a hassle; epecially if you don't have a car.
After near-record polution in Paris, the city enforced a partial ban on car use to help clear the city's air. On Monday, morotorists with an even numbered plate were told to leave their car come, or be fined. and on that Tuesday, people with odd numbered plates would have to do the same. Because of that, nearly 4,000 people were fined. And 27 people had their cars impounded due to the way they acted upon being fined. Though it left some unhappy people, it did help; the congestion was down by 30% in the city.
The City of Bogota, Colombia has started a car-free day. And apparently it's a big hit. Its goal is to promote alternate transportation, and reduce smog, with the exception of buses and taxis. That day, millions of Colombians either walked, hiked, biked, or skated. And even though there was some gray clouds with a bit of rain, it didn't stop many people. It is also seen as an opportunity to help lower stress and air pollution. And to show its popularity, two other cities in the county; Cali and Velledupar have joined in on the event. Even the mayor of Asuncion, Paraguay came to the county to say how great of an idea it was. More parks, sports centers have been buit, and 118 miles of bike paths have been created. On top of that, new side-walks have been built to help people in general.
With all of the effort that so many countries have put out towards making a better environment for themselves, I hope you would be able to see why they did it, because I do. When it comes to making communities with car restrictions, or a day or two when use in limited it all helps. So Maybe I could convince you to reduce your car use, and improve your life. | 3 |
Have you ever wanted to help out people? maybe visit different countrys,Well the seagoing cowboy program is just for you. One reason you should join the seagoing cowboy program is because, you get to vist very nice places. for example if you ever wanted to go to china or any other country? In the program you can do all those things, that but of course you need to play your part in doing your job.
Another suggestion to join the program is because if your one of those caring people who love animals and love nature well the program includes that. In the program you need to take care care of animals mean while you get to your destinaton,And thats quite a bit of time,But thats the main reason why this program was built to help take care of aniamls while they get them to a safer place,Taking care of the aniamls is the main job in this program.
And for my final reason,
I think you should join this program because seeing all the different kind of places you can visit seems like a great opportuinty. You also get to see amazing places of that country/region. For example lets say you go to china you might have a chance of visitng the great wall of china. And in my opinion thats probabley the bst perk of the seagoing program. Along with teammates that might even become your friends.
In my opinion,I think that the seagoing cowboy program is a facisinating program overall. Taking care of animals,visting different countrys,Nice places you can see on the way. This program is probabley one of the best life time opportunitys. This is why i think you should join the seagoing cowboy program. | 2 |
Driverless cars are featured in the a lot of sci-fy movies, but are they really as wonderful as movies make them seem? This question is what is being adressed in the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming". A fully driverless car would not be optimal because the whole idea would be too expensive to address, nobody will pay attention to the road at all, and things could easily go wrong with a machine.
First I will explain how the whole idea of these 'driverless cars' would be too exensive. As stated in paragraph 3, "...they require massive upgrades to existing roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical". Now in this situation, they are talking about these roadways that would control the driverless cars. But, even if we didnt make the roads entirely like suggested in the article, we would still have to change roads all across America in some ways because they wouldn't be fit for a car to control. This would also suggest that off roading, or back road driving would be very challenging for any vehical, or computer to handle.
Second, I will explain how people will not pay attention to the roads at all. How exactally can you be certian that someone is doing something they are supposed to do? How can you force them? You can't. The most ideal way that these 'driverless cars' would be used, would be to assist companies with deliveries, so the driver of the truck could sleep and the truck could continue driving through the night, less stops = ideal time of delivery. But if the driver has to stay alert the whole time to take over in rough situations, they what even is the point of having automated cars past the point of assistance?
Lastly, I would like to address that things go wrong with machines all the time. So what would make a 'driverless car' any different? If we have to constantly be worried about how the automated car is running, or how the condition of it is, then we might as well just take that effort and apply it to ourselves. I can bet that these cars will not be 100% accident free, and neither are people. So if they arent really gong to benefit us in a large way, what would be the point of all the effort that would go into making this possible? Here's the answer; there isnt one.
In conclusion, a fully driverless car would not be optimal because the whole idea would be too expensive to address, nobody will pay attention to the road at all, and things could easily go wrong with a machine. So to answer my questions; no, driverless cars are not as wonderful as they seem. Yes they are a nice thought and after being perfected could probably help out the shipping industries a lot. Personally, I wouldn't want to drive on a road filled with people not paying attention. In worse case senarios, everyone involved would be caught off guard causing more harm than good. | 3 |
Do you think that venus would be safe to study? Well in my opion I dont think that it would be
good idea but the aurth does and I'm going to let you know why he thinks going to study venus is a good idea.
The autor thinks this is a good idea because he thinks people should be able to go and see whats it's like and how it looked like compared to earth otherthan look at it on a website or a piece of paper.
The author also suggeste to studying on venus because it is the nearest planetary vist and less space travel unlike mars and other plantes. If you had a chance to go would you want to be in space for a long time?
The author might have a point but I don't think venus would be a good place to go and study because it's so hot because it right by the sun and you don't know what kind of damge it can do to your body. What do you think about the authors purpose of studying on venus?
Thats
why I think the author thinks its a good idea to go and study on venus, me personally could not do it because I would get home sick and have anxsidy all the time. What about you, if you had the chance of a life time to go study venus would you do it ? | 1 |
Is it possible to explore Venus? Venus is known for having some of the harshest surface conditions of any planet in the solar system, so most would think exploring it would be impossible. That is not what the author of ¨The Challenge of Exploring Venus¨ believes. The author does not believe it will be easy to explore Venus, but does believe it is possible and worthwhile. Additionally, the author provides multiple reasons for exploring Venus with information to support them.
The author of ¨The Challenge of Exploring Venus¨ goes into great detail about the conditions and history of Venus. They explain everything from how Venus was nicknamed ¨Evening Star¨ to why it is so difficult to send probes to the surface that can function for long periods of time. They even delve into the theories that Venus was once an ocean planet, like early earth. They list some of the many natural disasters that can occur on the surface of Venus, such as earthquakes and eruptions. There are many hardships that would need to be faced in order to explore Venus, but according to this article it is not only possible but worthwhile.
The author also explains in ¨The Challenge of Exploring Venus¨ many of the possible methods that would need to be used to explore Venus safely. The author discusses many possibilites, such as having scientists float above the surface in a blimp. It may also be possible to send probes with more simplified electronics built with silicon carbide. Of course, all of these pathways would require a great deal of research, effort, and resources. So is exploring Venus even worthwhile?
The author explains many reasons for why exploring Venus is a good decision. First of all, Venus is the closest planet to Earth in the solar system. It would make sense for humanity to begin it´s exploration of space with Earth´s closest neighbor. It is also possible that Venus could have contained life at one point, since it likely once had vast oceans. Venus has a vey similar topography to Earth as well. The author supports all of these reasons with factual evidence in their article.
Exploring Venus would no doubt have many major hardhips to overcome, but the author of ¨The Challenge of Exploring Venus¨ explains perfectly why it is worth the effort. Venus holds many secrets, and if humanity can discover them, who knows what could be possible? In their essay the author has many arguements for why Venus should be explored with factual evidence to back them up. | 3 |
Have you ever driven a car? If so, were you actually driving or was this car a driverless car? Many people are preferring to ride in driverless cars or semi driverless cars. Without your eyes on the road, how can driverless cars be safe? The Author of "Driverless Cars Are Coming" gives examples of how driverless cars can result in being late, more expensive, and more acciddents.
In the story " Driverless Cars Are Coming" paragraph three, states many companies that have started making these driverless cars. One being General Motors, whose idea was towards "Smart Roads". Having smart roads would be rediculous becuase of the expensises in using magnets and the special car sensor needed. If we had smart raods, and the road broke, what would we do? Basing all of our driving on a "Smart Road" would increase the risk of it breaking and everyone being late.
Okay, so smart raods are a terrible idea. What about smart cars? Google came out with a Toyota Prius. The prius uses postion-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a roatating senor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automatic radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor. Sounds cool right? There are a couple problems with all of this stuff on a car. The first problem being that if one thing broke it would be super expensive. the second problem being if one thing broke nobodywould be able to drive at all. The last problem with all of the gudgets on the car is having the extra weight on the car would make the gas milage go through the roof.
So, smart roads and smart cars are starting to sound like a bad idea. Still can not make up your mind? Take the human mind as a consideration. These smart cars would make humans lazy. If we had these driverless cars we would not pay any attention to whats going on on the road. In the story "Driverless Cars Are Coming" paragraph eight reads " some manufacturers hope to bring in-car entertainment. Think about what would happen if a car had a malfunction, would the other riders in the driverless cars be paying attention? Think about if a kid ran in the street after thier ball, would the car or the driver know? Finally, think about how much boring the world would be if you only rode in the car not drove it? Would you see the the beautiful blue sky or the amazing adventure of the forest? No, you wpould not. The little things are what make driving such a privledge not a right.
In conclusion, driverless cars are not a good idea. As people, we should always look ahead at what is in front of us. In "Driverless Cars Are Coming", the author states both good and bad ideas of the driverless cars, I encourge you to think about the little things and the bad thing, on why we should not allow driverless cars. | 3 |
Earth got a twin? yes Earth does have a twin called Venus. Venus is a place where you wouldn't want to be living right now. In fact, they could be dangerous in many ways. venus was a place to live before according to the autuhor they said "long ago,Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various form of life" basically what the author is trying to say is that as earth we have water and have life and so did venus but later on that had changed.
Venus can be dangerous in many ways. some of the ways are that Venus is so hot that the tempeture is about to 800 degrees fahrenheit and the pressure is about 90 times worse than what earth has. on the article the author said "temperatures average over 800 degrees fahrenhiet, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experince on our own planet". this quotes tells me how hot it is and how bad it will be if we end up living in venus.
also even though mercury is closer to the sun, Venus is still hotter than any other planet. The author said
"Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though mercury is closer to our sun" basically what the author is trying tp say is Mercury is not hotter than Venus even though its closer to the sun.
Another important point is that Venus has a bad weather. according to the author they said "Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface" basically what this is trying to say is they have more bad weather than what Earth does. when youre on earth you barely get any earthquakes or lighning strikes, we do get them but it is not as bad as if it was on Venus.
In conclusion, i think we shouldn't really mess with venus because even if we try to find a way to live on there it woudnt work. if we were to live in venus everyone will die of heat,hunger because if the heat is way to hot than there will be no vegtables, fruits or animals. and if there isnt none of that than we wont eat and we will die. why bother some place where there no living and we will end up dying. but they could investigate more about venus. | 2 |
I think that people should participate in the seagoing Cowboys program because it makes people more aware of people and there needs. It helps you think of other people instead of just yourself and being selfish. It's a very good job for people because they help people and animals that are lost or hurt and they go sightseeing. They go on many adventures during the job.
Here are some of the places they went while sightseeing. They went to Europe and China they saw the Acropolis in Greece which was special to them.They also took a gondola ride in Venice, Italy a city with streets of water. Lastly they toured a excavated castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal on the way to China. Those are a lot of places that they have traveled to. Those sound like awesome places to visit.
Whenever they were bored on the boat they would play games like baseball and volleyball. They also play table tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, and whittling and games that just helped pass time. They would also have the best time unloading the animals that they got which was there favorite thing to do. It is probably a good job because in the beginning of the story Luke talked about how it was an opportunity of a lifetime to have that job which means it must be a special job. He also said at the end of the story that he experienced new adventures like all the things he did so if you like adventures then that's a good job for you. That is why I think people should have this job it sounds like a pretty good job for everyone.
It opens up the world to people and lead his family to host a number of international students and exchange visitors for many years. Sometimes the job isn't that good like the time Luke fell of the boat and cracked his rib but now he is better. The job will help people and I think that the job would make the world a better place by everyone helping people and caring for the animals. That is why people should get this job to help the world. | 2 |
The
School system needs more , its things going on in students lives that makes them angry and sad coming into school. With them feeling this way makes them not wanting to do the work or learn at all. An thats where this Facial Action Coding System Comes in. The System being able to pick up these emotions would give the chance to notify the adult in charge and maybe can get help.
Teachers aren't all perfect, yes they educate in the best way possible. But student could be confused or bored in,and can even come to school feeling sad or angry about things outside of school. Teachers wouldnt be able to pick this up. Thats why we need this Facial Action Coding System. Facial Action Coding System can do things ,like said in the article it can pick up if a student is confused or bored. Then modify the lesson like an effective human instuctor.
In conclusion this is why we need the Facial Action Coding System. To Better the school system , by not just teaching. But thinking of how the student feels. Like if sngry and sad , the machine picks it up and we can ask the student. Just trying to help can make a student better. If feeling bored or confused we can also help by getting better with teaching method ,so students wont feel bored or confused. That way wteachers are really educating students | 2 |
Driverless cars may seem like a cool new innovation that take the stress away from driving. The truth is that while there are many positive things about driverless cars there are still many complications with introducing them into society. Without a driver, the mechanics could malfunction and cause a safetly threat to other drivers and pedestrians. Many states also have laws against even testing driverless cars. Even thought the car can do the basic driving by itself, the human passangers still need to take control for more complicated road conditions. The production and use of driverless cars is negative to society because they pose a safety threat, force laws to change, and they still require human control.
Saftey is always a concern when dealing with any type of motor vehicle and driverless cars increase the risk of safety because they do not have human control. Every state has road laws that every driver is meant to follow. Traffic laws assume that, "the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times"("Driverless Cars Are Coming"). This evidence states how the laws believe that a car is only safe when there is a human controlling it. These laws are meant to promote safety and since they state a human needs to be in control for a vehicle to be safe, then driverless cars are not the best thing for safety. This is negative because when there is a larger safety risk, more people may be fatally injured and the general public will feel unsafe. the use of driverless cars on the road would require the laws to be modified and allow their use.
Another way that driverless cars are negative to society is that they would force the laws to change to accommadate them. All over the country there are laws in place that prohibit the use of driverless cars. According the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming", "in most states it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars". Since driveress cars are illegal in most states, in order for them to be used on the roads all of the laws relevant to this topic would need to be changed or adjusted. Changing the laws is negative because changing the already safe laws could cause the general public to be unsafe and the process for changing the laws is a hastle. It needs to be sent in and approved by many government branches and could be rejected by any one, causing the process to repeat. Not only is it a hastle and burden, it is also takes a lot of time. Even if the laws are changed the cars still require human involvement
Driverless cars may seem more convenient but in reality they require human interaction in any tough traffic situation. As a result this is negative because it is not improving the convenience for drivers. Some say that driverless cars are more convenient, but in fact they can only perform the easy aspects of driving without the aid from the human driver. Driverless cars "can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents. This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires human skills"("Driverless Cars Are Coming"). This evidence shows how involved humans have to be in a "driverless" car. An invention that seems convenient actually requires the driver to be more alert so they know when they need to step in to control the car in difficult situations. This is negative because waiting for difficult road conditions can cause a driver to be more stressed and anxious than they would be if they were normally driving a car. Since the driver needs to more alert and the fact that driverless cars are not that convenient at all there is no reason for them to be on the roads.
In conclusion, driverless cars should not be produced and driven on the roads becasue they pose a saftely threat to the general public, they require the laws to change and they still need human interaction and therefore are not a convenience. Considering this, is it really worth all the risk and hastle just for something "cool" to be on the road? Would it still be cool if these vehicles endangered you or a family member? | 4 |
Most people disagreee on the idea of taking away cars or creating fuel effeicent cars. One idea that can possibly top all those is a limited car usage society. Natiosn worldwide have vbegun starting a new trend/ orsmartplanning which limits cars usage due to the ecomony ,pollution it creates.
To begin with, limiting cars is becoming a new fad, people in VAUBAN,Germany(Dorchland) say it saves alot of time and money. Now you can just have your house in the suburbs and just stick to foot traffic youdont have to worry about car insurance or garages or keeping drive ways clean. No more dirty streets clean and motor sound free walking. With this new smart planning going on its harder for people to take there kids around and get to work. What goes along with this effect it saves people more money.
Lastly, Limiting usage of cars is going to help better the enviorment. Recently paris was under an enforced ban due to to a cloud of smog pollution. The use of cars releases toxi and bad gases into the atomosphere destroying are enviorment and causing effects on the polar ice caps. The limit use of cars cuts traffic down and time. another effect use we could use is a car free day were we could take buses , bicycles , and even skateboards. one major thing we should replace with our cars is public transports.
Inconclusion
Limiting cars usage is helpful and becoming more popular globally it can help the economy and also help slow down pollution. | 1 |
I am for the use of this technology becaus it would help kids who are confused in a way that they don't know what to do on the assignment or how to begin working. This technology will put the words in a different way for the student to learn the material after the computer learns their emotion and know what to do about it.
When adults or young teens plan on getting jobs that envolve on sitting at a dest they might get frustrated and don't know what to do and the computer would be able to detect thier emotions and take a different approach and help you undertsand the work faster. By getting work faster this will emprove the work production and people wouldn't have to stay for late hours to get work done.
This will help computers understand the different emotions that are going through people and the computer will react to it pretty quickly. I think this will be very helpful in the future to child to adults. While the computer still learns different emotions they will help people around the world and education will be a higher percentage of students will go to college and stay in school because of this technology. | 1 |
Driverless cars are becoming a reality, rather than a dream. Google has been using them to create their 3-D maps around the globe, and now they are allowed in certain states of the U.S. Most have a very low collision rate, and could be handy in many situations. But even though they are an invention and are useful in some ways, there are too many legal things that could go wrong for them to be worthwhile. If a car crashes, is it the owner's fault or the car manufacturer? Will it make people rely even more on computers? Driverless cars, although a very useful invention for some purposes, will not catch on because of the legal issues that would follow, depenicey on computers that could fault to error, and the rewriting of driving laws and an education to even learn how to work with the autonomonus vehicle.
When you get into an accident with your car, usually it can fall under two catagories: your fault with driving, or the conditions of the outside and the built of the car. For a drastic example, if somebody was not paying attention to the road, rather a phone, and winds up headfirst into a tree, that does not require the car manufacturer to intervene because it was the driver's fault. Opposing, if there is a recall in the anti-lock break system and it causes a person to crash, that is more at fault with the car company, as their breaks were not up to standards and safety regulations. But with the idea of driverless cars becoming a reality, the line between the person and the manufacturer is blurred. If the car was driving itself and for some reason gets into an accident, is it the owner's fault, even if they couldn't control it? Or is the car manufacturer's fault, even if they had installed a sensor so that the person could take over? This arguement could lead to a lot of trials and conflicts over the legality of the car, and compared with other events happening, it would become more of a problem rather than a positive, causing legal battles and controversy over the car.
With the generation coming in of kids who have lived through the start of modern technology and social media, the baby-boomers and so on have a lot to say about the issue of modern technology. Many say it is a waste of time, and is teaching the new generations to be lazier, while it doesn't rather apply to social media and the interenet, as it has made a wonderful contribution to the global network, it can be argued that a driverless car while the driver sits and waits is rather lazy. But the bigger issue is the dependency on the computer; computers get hacked, glitchy, and tricky as it is, and it is rather unsettling to think the computer running your car, which holds your life, can screw up and change your life entirely. It is more settling if there were the mentioned lights and buzzers to let us know what is going on. "GM has developed driver's seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger... Other options under consideration are flashing lights on the windshield and other heads-up displays." (7). Even though those forementioned signals are being in place, what if they are not working as well? Even though that might be a small chance of it happening, it is always a risk. To rely on a computer with your own life in the situation that you could use an actual car is quite unsettling, and even if it is safe at first, can always lead to accidents and glitches.
With the rise of the autonomous car, many precautions and risks are in place.
The chance of a legal battle with a car manufauctuer, and the idea of the computer glitching at the wheel are just two details about why the idea of an autonomous car would be more of a negative than a positive. The invention and ideas behind it are very well-supported and used well today, the reality is that it won't catch on to become mainstream. There are too many what-if's that if brought up, would make the general market iffy on letting go of the wheel. | 4 |
Should we keep the Electoral College or changing to election by popular vote for the President of the United States? We should change to election by popular vote for the President. "Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL- CIO all agreed on Abolishing the Electoral College. According to a Gallup poll in 2000 shortly after Al Gore won popular vote from the Electoral College but lost the Presidency. 60% of voters would prefer a direct election like the one we have now."
What is wrong with the Electoral College? The Electoral College system voters vote not for the President but also for a slate of electors, whom which in turn to elect the President. The Electoral College is an anachronism. "The Electoral College is not a democratic in modern sense, its the electors who elect the president not the people." For exmaple President Obama received 61.7% of the electoral vote comparison to 51.3% popular votes casted for him and Romney.
"Electoral College avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast." 1968 - Nixon; 1992 - Clinton only had 43% plurality of the popluar vote, while winning majority in Electoral College. "Pressure for run - off elections when no candidate wins a majority of the votes cast; the pressure which would complicate the presidential election process, which is reduced by the Electoral College, which invariably produces a clear winner."
"Electoral College method of selecting the president may turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope of carrying their state." In 2000 Fiasco was the biggest ekection crisis in a century. State Legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people. The Electoral College is unfair to voters because of the winner take all system in each state. The candidates don't spend the time in states they know that they have no chance of winning, they only focus on the tight races.
Should we keep the Electoral College or changing to election by popular vote for the President of the United States? We should change it to election by popular vote. The Electoral College is unfair, outdated, and is irrational. Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole are in agreement for abolishing the Electoral College. | 3 |
In "The challenge of Exploring Venus" Venus is also known as "Evening Star". Venus is one of the brightest points in the sky at night. It is also the second closest planet to Earth,that's why we can see it at night. Mars is also close to us but only at certain times, it all depends on speed otherwise how fast it orbits around us. The atmosphere on Venus is 97 percent carbon dioxide which means there's no air, the clouds are made of corrosive sulfuric acid. The temperature is over 800 degrees fehrenheit.
The atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater, so if we were to send any type if mechanical transportation over there, it would into liquid as soon as it gets there. Venus has the hottest surface temperature than any other plant in our solar system. Venusian geology says that their are additional impediments the erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning stikes. That means their are multiple natural disasters going on at the same time. Astronomers think that long age, Venus was like our planet (Earth).
The planet has a surface of rocky sediment like mountains, craters and valleys.
NASA thinks that they could put a blimp or some kind of futuristic jet airplanes in outerspace. In the article, NASA was talking about electronics made of "silicon carbide". If NASA could add silicon carbide to a jetplane and some how remote control the aircraft, it might work. I noticed how the author capitalized the "Venus, NASA, Earth, and all the other planets. Also I saw how the author punctuated and put a comma in between sentences to take a breath when speaking. I liked how he put a lot of detail into what NASA thought they should do. I read how they planned out what kinds of tranportations they could send to Venus. They even tested the conditions with certain matierials and objects. | 0 |
Driverless cars shouldn't be coming honestly. In my opinion, I don't like the idea of driverless cars very much. It seems a little bit too risky for me; but I'm going to give some reasons why it would actually be a good reason to have driverless cars. First, you would be able to just sit back and relax and watch the road while you're waiting for your turn to drive. Second, you could also grab something on the floor while your in the drivers seat, like if your kid dropped something in the back of the car and they can't grab it, you can try to grab it because the car will be in motion by itself, but you still need to be very cautious on the roads at all times. Third, if you were running late to work or where ever you needed to be, you can make a quick phone call or send out a text and tell them that you will be late for whatever reasons.
Now, lets talk about the negative things. Some of the negative things I don't like about this is that what is the speakers in the car went out and you ca't hear the manufactuer of the car tell you when to take the wheel, or if the car automatically went out of control and you had no poweer or stering of the wheel; you'll be screwed then. To be completely honest, I wouldn't even try to drive a criverless car because I need to know for sure that I'm going to be safe when I'm in the car or driving with a person or a few people among that. I wouldn't feel safe at all, what so ever. Espcially if I was in that car with someone else who is driving, I would feel very uncomfortable, wouldn't you? I mean, seriously. The manufactuer of the car probably doesn't always do its job right, even though it said in the passage that a driverless car has never been in a crash or accident, you don't know what the future holds and anything could happen at any point in time. The car could stop working at anytime too, espcially if it was a plug in/charge car.
Quite frankly, I don't think I like this idea of a driverless car. It seems unsafe and risky, espcially if you have the wrong people in the car with you. If we all had no choice but to buy a driverless car, looks like I'm not buying one. I'll be walking or biking everywhere I go. Would you consider buying and using a driverless car for the rest of your life? | 2 |
In this article it talks about how scientists should focus on exploring Venus our sister planet. They want to further explore Venus because of how facinating the planet is. The only problem is that the weather, atmosphere, and pressure on Venus is very deadly. No spaceship has ever lasted a long time on Venus, so not much is really known about what is hiding on its surface. That's why scientists thing that we should explore more into Venus. By exploring Venus our understanding of more planets in out solar system would expand greatly.
The author gives many claims and examples of how we can further explore Venus with little to no probelms. The first claim is that a blimp-like ship could hover over the planet at a safe area to achieve more information anout the planet and atmosphere. The temperature would still be hot and crazy, but it would not be as hot as the surface of Venus is. Also the pressure would be safe and would not kill anyone like it would on the surface of Venus. But the only probelm with this idea is that the people can not get any physical samples of rock, gas, and any other material on Venus. They would only be able to observe from the ship that is hovering over the planet. This idea would work, but the information that we would get wouldn't be as helpful as acturally going onto Venus's surface
Another claim that the author gives that we could try is that, scientist have made simplified electronics made out of silicon carbide already that can survive up to 3 weeks in the conditions Venus has. Along with this is by looking back into older technologies and how strong and stable they are. And how we can incorperate this into ships and other things that could travel to Venus safely. This would work but it wouldn't last forever and would eventrally melt and or something would happen to the objects that are preasent. This idea would work up to a certain area and would give us only limited information that we could obtain.
The author is all for exploring Venus and that we should try harder and focus more on the exploration of Venus. The author does give some decent claims about how we could take it into action. But the claims he gives don't really show how we can get to Venus. The claims that the author has given in the reading are well but together, and they seem like they would work up to a certain extent. In the reading the author makes it seem that we should put all of our time into exploring Venus, and he gives many reasons why. And what information we would gain out of exploring Venus. The author gives many helpful ideas that would not be as dangerous as just going to the planet's surface. Overall the auhtor gives his support to the exploration of Venus, and his claims are very well towards that idea as well.
In all not just the author thinks that we should explore our sister planet Venus. There are many people that have thought of this idea and that we should work towards it. Venus is a very interesting planet and has many things that have yet been discovered about it. Overall the author fully supports that claim that we should further explore Venus for many reasons that would be successful to us and help our knowledge grow.
Venus is the only planet that could've looked like earth many years ago, and still has many similar features to this day with earth. | 4 |
In the our world we are living in, the technology is expanding and is becoming more useful in our daily lives. In addition, the new technologly helps us achieve difficult tasks. The Facial Action Coding System may help teachers in classrooms to better understand the students by knowing their emotions.
In a classroom teachers are expected to communicate with the students. The technology would help read the student emotions, according to the text, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused and bored". By using the students facial movements, the technology reads the students emotion. The use of this technology will help the teachers communicate with the students' emotion.
Secondly, the FACS can help the students and teachers better understand each other in a classroom setting. By knowing each others emotions, allows teh students and the teachers to have an open mind. In the text, "Aclassrooom computer could recognize when a student is becoming condused or bored," Dr. HUang predicts. "Then it could modify the lesson,". This can allow the teachers to 'modify lesson' to help the students understand more fluently.
In conclusion, this technology should be used in a classrom because it will improve the communication and understanding between the students and teachers. Without the FACS, the teachers would struggle to read the emotions of students. | 2 |
The Facial Action Coding System, or FACS, could be useful for school purposes, and may help students and teachers tremendously. On the otherhand, however, it is not perfect and may cause more issues than it solves.
For school purposes, the FACS can be used to alter an online course, assessment, or even just a simple knowledge check, using facial expressions to determine if the students are confused, bored, or if they understand it. If they are confused, it may be altered to help them understand whatever it is they're working on. For someone who is bored, it may try to make an online course more interesting to grasp their attention.
However, the FACS is not perfect. It may mistake a facial expression for the wrong emotion. This could result in issues involving altering an online assessment, or course. Some students may feign emotions, and make faces to do the easier course that's meant for students who require additional help. Also, students who take an online course may be confused about something else, not the course they're taking. The FACS will still read that expression as confusion and alter it because of that confusion.
Altogether, I feel that these cons outweigh the pros too much, and I believe that the FACS should not be used for purposes such as an online course or assessment. Too much may go wrong too easily with the use of FACS. | 2 |
In the article said that is dangerous to explore Venus because it has a thick atmosphere of 97 percent carbon dioxide and the highly corrosive sulfuric acid clouds it has over 800 degrees fahrenheit and the atmospheric presssure is 90 times greater that we experience, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, it has many natural disasters like erupting volcanoes, powerful eartquakes and frequent lightning strikes, Venus is the planet that is some how similar to the earth, they can go there but it only have limited insight, the author supporsts his idea telling us many details of how Venus is dangerous to explore and how the NASA trys to explore inventing many objects that are going to work inside the planet, this planet is the closest planet to earth that is why they really want to explore it, in conclusion i think he really support this idea because in every paragraph he tells us how dangerous and how is different to the earth,to explore this planet they have to invent objects that can work there because this melts every type of technology they want to use , explore this planet is very challenging. | 1 |
In 2009 Google created "driverless cars". They weren't fully independant but they were the beginning of something great. Driverless cars will save the lives of people who would otherwise die in a car crash. Driverless cars will create jobs for people who need jobs. People are getting lazier and lazier, and they don't want to drive themselves anymore. Driverless cars are the future.
Car crashes are caused when a driver isn't paying attention or they are intoxicated. This could mean the driver was texting, eating, changing the radio station, or even falling asleep at the wheel. With driverless cars people will be able to do whatever they want while the car is driving without worrying about crashing. They could text all they want or even sleep. The driver just needs to be prepared to take over the wheel if the driverless car runs into a roadblock and needs to go on a detour or needs to be parked. Driverless cars will take people who are out with freinds anywhere they want to go. Having friends in the car with you is one of the most distracting things to a driver, with all the talking and laughing. Things can go bad really fast. These cars will also help keep intoxicated drivers off the road. Some driverless cars can independantly complete ninety percent of the tasks required. This will get an intoxicated person very close to their home if not all the way there.
Driverless cars will create jobs. Jobs in programing, design, manufacturing, and upkeep of the cars. Some might say that driverless cars will take more jobs than it gives. These people say that taxi drivers and bus drivers will lose their jobs. Yes, that is most likely true but they will create so many more jobs. The amount of jobs created will be more than the ones lost. As Spock once said "The needs of the many outway the needs of the few, or the one."
People are getting lazier and lazier, they don't want to drive themselves anywhere anymore. This is one of the reasons that we need driverless cars. As society evolves we see that people are getting lazier. Lazy people don't want to drive anywhere. This is where driverless cars come in. Driverless cars will take lazy people who don't pay attention to their destination safely and without accident. People might say that driverless cars end up making people lazier by allowing them to do little to nothing and still get where they want to go. Yes, people might get lazier but it is better than people dying form crashing their car.
Driverless cars will save lives of people who would otherwise die in a car crash. Driverless cars will create jobs for people who need jobs. Driverless cars will also help people who are very lazy. These reasons and many others is why we need driverless cars. Driverless cars are the future. | 4 |
The article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" talks about the positive and negative aspects of the driverless cars. I am totally against the development of these cars. They are not safe, they are not necessary, and anything can go wrong. I do not like thinking that the production of these cars can lead to harm or bad things in the future.
I am against the development of the driverless cars because they are not safe enough to be on real rodes. If there are children in the car and something happens to the car it could hurt the kids and be very dangerous. Also not having control of the wheel at all times is dangerous because even now when people don't have their hands on the wheel there are multiple risks like crashing. Another thing that is not safe about these cars is that if it goes out of control on the road many lifes could be in danger and no one would know if it was the driver or the car.
Another reason I am againt the driverless car is that they aren't necessary. Cars now are simple. People know how to press on the gas and turn the stearing wheel the way they want to go. It isn't necessary to make a brand new car that can drive on its own if people know how to drive with their hands and feet perfectly fine. A lot of people in the world drive. If they don't like driving they catch busses or taxis. Even with the driverless car the car still needs a driver. And if most people drive there is no point in making a driverless car that you still have to drive. There is no point in paying a lot of money for a driverless car when you stil have to drive it. Also why take chances on a car that you still have to drive when you have a car that you know how to drive? You would pay all that money just to still end up driving.
A third reason I'm going against the development of the driverless car is that something can go wrong. There are so many things that could go wrong with the driverless car and no one should take that chance. If a sensor messes up and doesn't detect a wreck coming up instead of notifying the driver it could keep driving and crash into the other vehicals. There are so many different issues involving construction, wrecks, and traffic on the road and if one thing goes wrong with the car it could mess up everything and something very dangerous could happen. If it doesn't sense that their is construction ahead and it keeps going something bad could happen and people could end up paying a lot of money.
Having a driverless car isn't worth the risk. There are many reasons the driverless car doesn't need to be on the roads. They are not safe, they aren't neccessary, and anything can go wrong at anytime. They shouldn't put the driverless cars on the road because if anything goes wrong everyone around could be in danger. The companies need to make sure that A sensor will never mess up and that everything is 100% perfect with the car before they put it out for anyone to use it. | 3 |
Driverless Cars , imteresting topic and idea . Many people say " Driverless cars will lower accedents " or " They drive and we txt and talk " Simple as it gets right? Wrong lets keep it simple we're becoming lazy and slowly losing our culture . everything is becoming automatic nothing is done by hand . If you wanna know what the weather is like you look at your phone , how about you step outside to see if it is cold or hot . Another case we need to gain back our culture and becoming the people that say " lets do this " and lets not be the people that say " Lets let them do it " we are becoming more dependable on technology more than ever . its to the point were we are at driverless cars? come on people , we might as well have driverless NASCAR then if people dont wanna drive . NASCAR is boring enough but lets put robots behind the wheel and see what happens. Instead of focusing on ways to improve ways to sit back and relax how about we find ways for us to improve our cars instead of having someone drive them for us . Take pride in your car , Take pride in your country , Take pride in your self.
Another topic of the matter , when you get your first car its a great feeling you can drive around with your friends and turn up the radio and have a fantastic time . but think of it this way , you get picked up by a car driven by a robots , this robot can't hold a conversation , this robot can't dance with you and talk about funny jokes and then go out to dinner with yah and eat with yah . But you can do all that your frinds,family or even a guy that you just meet or even a new girlfriend ! times should be kept simple and easy and fun , not controlled by a non memory making robot . Remeber your memories and remeber your non robotic car . | 1 |
have u wondered wat is that face on mars? Is it proof of life or just a natural landform, well i am here to tell u its just a natural landform.
Its a juts a natural landform because in the story it says NASA unveiled the image for all the see and the cption noted a huge rock formation which resembles a human head formed by shadelows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth making it look like proof of life on mars. If u need more proof on april 5, 1998 the MOC team snapped a picture tens times sharper than the original viking photos. thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site revealing a natural landform.
So thats proof thats it just a natural landform and not proof of life on mars, but maybe soon NASA will find proof of living life on mars. | 1 |
Can there be life on Mars? The answer is NO! How can there be life on mars without food, water, plants, and oxygen. For a human to live on Mars they would have to bring a life supply on food and water, but you can't have a life supply of oxygen. So there can not be life on mars.
The Face on Mars is not a really face. There can not be life on Mars. First, aliens are not real. Second, there is no oxgyen. The article "Unmasking the Face on Mars," states "huge rock formation.... which resembles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose,and mouth."
The Face on Mars only happen one time. Another aircraft went back at the same degress and a cloudy day just like the one before. When it took the picture there was just a landform. This aircraft even had a better camera and took even more pictures.
The article says " What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West." Gavin says " It reminds me most of Middle butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho, that's a lava dome that takes the form of an islated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars."
That is why the Face on Mars is just a landform not a alien or an alien made it. It was just a illusion not anthing else. | 2 |
Human emotion. Once thought to be something held exclusive to humans, can now be interpreted by computers. Allowing anything with a camera to read the muscles in ones face to tell the emotion they currently portray. There are many different outlooks on the future use of this technology, but one in particular focuses on using it in the classroom.
The technololgy used to read our emotions is known as the Facial Action Coding System or FACS. It models a human face and all 44 of its muscles, and looks for certain cues to tell them emotion being conveyed by the subject. FACS can tell when one is happy, sad, angry, cionfused, surprised, disgusted, and afraid. FACS can even tell the difference between "fake" emotions and real ones. This means that it can tell if a facial expression is being forced, based on what muscles are being used.
On the subject of use in the classroom, it could be very benificial to students and teachers alike. It can read when a student gets confused on a topic, and can then adjust the lesson to fit their needs. It can tell when a student is feeling drowsy and upset, or when a student is attentive and alert. This way teachers can recognize when a student needs assistance. This technology, in all, can be very useful if applied to them classroom, and even the rest of the world, properly, making it a very impressive step into the future for mankind.
Just think. A computer able to read the human face to determi9ne what emotion they feel. Skepticism is understandable, what with the advancement of AI and related movies such as The Terminator, where AI has tooken over the human race, but a future like that is to be left in the world of fiction. This technology is the next step into the age of human technology integration, like we've already seen with the introduction of smart devices. Mankind will only continue to move forward and innovate, even beyond percieved limits. | 2 |
Although it would be nice to have a driverless cars, the possibilities of getting into an accident are tremendous. I wouldn't want to have to rely on my car to drive me anywhere at anytime. Just the thought of not having the control of the wheel scares me. Having to trust your car to do the things you want it to do is stomach wrenching. I think it is just as bad as texting and driving.
Manufactures created this thing to signal and alert when the drivers must take control. What if the driver fell asleep? What if he/she were to busy that they didn't feel the vibrating of the chair or couldn't see the flashing lights on the windshield? You might think it isn't a problem but if you think about it, it is. Driverless cars would probably make people start depending on their cars a lot more. This could cause drivers to become lazy and not worry about what might happen. When someone lazy depends on something, they don't really think twice about it. This would make them not care about driving.
Another thing to think about is how the driverless car would react to a sudden accident. What if a car came crashing into the driverless car that it didn't have time to react. It would mean that the driver wasn't paying attention to the road and not fast enough reflex to take over the wheel. In paragraph 7 it states, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents." A driverless car shouldn't be trusted completly for one of this reason. In paraghraph 7 it states another, "This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." Again, what if the driver was to busy not paying attention or was ditracted? What if the were to slow to react just in time?
If texting and driving is illegal, why should a driverless car have a shot? It is basically the same thing. You won't have your hands on the steering wheel. You won't be paying attention to your surroundings. You would have your eyes somewhere other than the roads. A driverless car would make someone put all their trust into it and hope for the best.
I would rather have the complete control of the wheel rather than letting technology take over it. Technologies don't always work out well. I wouldn't want to rely on something that can take my life or someone else life for that matter. "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-- the driver ot the manufacturer?" I take driving realy seriously and to think that I wouldn't even be driving a car while I'm in one is already stressing enough. | 4 |
Venus is our sister planet, it may have once been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system, so why can't we explore it to see the similarities? It's the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally in distance too. Many scientists want to take the risks of studying this planet to see exactly what the planet has in store because it was once the most like the planet we live on today. The author of the article gives us many facts and statistics as to how Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents.
In the article, the author tells about how the fast the planets move, and how sometimes Venus is right around the corner. Humans have sent numerous spacecrafts to land on Venus and each mission was unmanned. No spacecraft has survived the landing for more than a few hours. The challenge of studying Venus has to deal with the temperature and the different type of atmosphere and environment within the planet. We need a mission that is both, safe and scientifically productive that avoids all of the dangers.
The atmosphere contains almost 97 percent of carbon dioxide that blankets Venus. This is very dangerous to us being that we take in oxygen and release carbon dioxide, it can harm us easily and even cause death. There are also clouds
of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere, which can also be fairly dangerous to us with the carbon dioxide as well. The author tells about how differently the temperature ranges are on the planet and the atmospheric pressure is compared to what we experience on Earth, which is why they're trying to find other, safer, ways to study the planet.
The environment of Venus would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals, so a human traveling to study Venus is very risky and possibly life-threatening. Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system making it impossible for anyone to land on the planet. Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments such as erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface.
Despite all of the dangers, Venus may have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system, being that long ago it could've consisted of oceans and supported various forms of life, just like Earth! If we can find ways to study the planet safely and productively, we will do it, but it's nothing risking your life over. The planet contains a lot of carbon dioxide and sulfuric acid in the atmosphere which is something we cannot breathe in but if we find a way around it, such as using machines to send down to the planet that can withstand the temperatures and environment or hovering ontop of the planet to see the conditions would be the best option. For the scientists seeking to land on the planet, they can use different devices made out of silicon carbide that can last for a couple of weeks, or mechanical computers. Venus, being our sister planet and having many similarities to us, is something that intruiges many people, but being able to land there isn't likely. Finding a safe and productive way to fulfill many people's curiosity is the most efficient and best way to learn more about the planets that are like ours! We can always find new technologies and ways to explore and study new things without putting ourselves in danger or risking our lives. | 3 |
Driverless cars can indead be a scary, or harmful thing. When you are in a car, you would want all the control you can get not little, half or none. Or it can be relaxing and intersting.. if nothing goes wrong.
Driverless cars offer very little control from a human, which can also be an issue, or a nervous thing with some people or many people. Even newer cars today require less of a human handling type deal.
Driverless cars can be a dangerous thing, when you have none of the
control of what your car may do next it could be a scary thing."They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves..". A driverless car that can "brake itself" could be very dangerous. For instance what happens if you come to a stop light\sign and the car doesnt break, something goes wrong in the sensors and it keeps going. "if technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault- the driver or the manufacturer?". This is one burning question that manufactuers have to face when
dealing with driverless cars.If the senors or the automatic brakes, accelerate system decides one day it just does not
want to drive itself any more, and the human driver is not able to get back in control, who is at fault, the human driver, or the manufacturer?. The driver should not have to be worried about this happening, especially if they are new drivers, new teenage drivers not to mention the nervous cautious drivers.(heads up display) "Such displays can be turned off instantly when the driver needs to take over- something not available to dirvers trying to text with a cell phone". This is where danger comes in. If you are in your driverless car and some people might think that the car is in control i do not need to steer or break anytime soon, or at all i will just check my messages.If this happens and the " heads up display" does not give any type of heads up and the sensors or the automatic driving system instantly stops.. it is an accident waiting to happen.
Although driverless cars may sound new and exciting to be able to have. There is always downsides of it that dealerhsips fail to explain, which is a recipe for something bad. Driverless cars need alot more work, and saftey hazards checked out before any one sets foot inside it. Saftey is key on the roads of a city, there should always be a car to match that saftey. | 2 |
the author thinks that we will studied more about Venus do too human curiousity. But knows its very dangerous to study Venus
Its dangerous to study Venus because its air is much thicker than earths and isnt even oxygen and the temprature is greater tha earth,Venus has the highets ground temp even tho Murcary is closer to the sun than Venus. Venus might be a good option to sudies tho becasue it says that it may at one point have been like earthand had oceans but we cant get too its surface to to our ships not making it threw the gasses and the ships just burning up. Scientist are working on a ship that will hover over Venus and take recorderings of it but the ship wont be able to land on the surface to stuided it. Scientist have made a cilicin that can go trew the rought terain and weather of Venus,they tested this with a special chamber simutlation,The rover lasted up to three weeks.
Scientist will study more about Venus and make new invetions that will be able to with stand the chaos of Venus. One day we will learn what Venus use to really be like and learn about its histroy. | 1 |
Have you ever wanted to go somewhere without having to drive your car? I know i have, well Google cofounder Sergey Brin, and Sebastian Thrun founder of Google car project are trying to come up with a way to get cars to be faster and secure for us.
Today in our world of driving there are many people that don't care about the security of our kids and their ownselves. Many Adults and teenagers are always on their phones distracted from the road and putting theirself in danger. Especially teenagers, teenagers are the most irresponsible on the road today. A lot of teenagers like to go party and get drunk. Well unfortunately for us that is a big problem for drivers and parents. Teenagers drive drunk and text on their phones while driving. Well with Cars that dont need drivers, Teenagers will be safer more than ever instead of putting their life and someone else's in danger.
In Conclusion, if we have cars that don't need drivers, teenagers will be less likely to get in a car accident, and aldults including teenagers won't be on their phones because they're not driving. So if we had driverless cars today there would be less accidents, deaths, and we could also save money on gas. | 1 |
Have you ever walked outside and taken a deep breath of fresh air but then you realise that the air youre breathing isnt alll that fresh? Thats because air pollution has greatly increased in recent years and the number one reason for air pollution is the exhaust from your cars. Yes, the amount of cars in the world has increaesed dramtically in the last 10 years. While this is good that the luxury of owning an auto mobile it has also put a burden on the earth and future generations. while cars have made it easier for our day to day lives the amount of pollution in the world has become too high to not do something about it now. instead of taking the modern convenience of a car what if you decided to ride your bike to work for a change.
The fact that the amount of pollution is ever imncreasing should be enough of a reason to limit car usage. Instead of driving every time you go somewhere if you just rode a bike or walked when its convienient you could make a difference in the world. You dont have to completely stop driving your car but just limit the amount of times you do drive and that little extra effort will make a big difference in the long run. the world is facing an epidimic in which we could not have clean air for our future generations to be able to take their kids to the park and enjoy a nice day in the sun.
Not only is limiting your car usage better for the enviroment it is also better for your body. When you decide to ride your bike or walk opposed to driving your car you are getting a work out from doing so. This may not seem like much but when you look at how often you go places the numbers start to add up. In the ten minutes that you would take to go to the bank you could spend fifteen minutes riding your bike and getting exercise multiple times through out the day. thiss can also give you much more free time to do something physically active that you ignored because of a car, with the motivation to go out pollution free you can start up running or even learn how to skate and enjoy the go.
When you decide to make the change and not drive as much you open up endless possibilities for what you could do instead of sitting in one place driving. You become more active in the community and this helps the enviroment and you as a person. limited driving has been proved to be a great idea in more ways than you would think. Just doing your part can help out.
In conclusion the facts are all here that limited car usage is the best way to go for decreasing air pollution and making you a better you. It will help the future become a brighter and cleaner place to live. | 3 |
I say that we keep the electoral college because it was the way that the founding fathers found out how to balance out how the peope should decide. But they were only allowed to vote if they had certain papers to allopw saying they are citizens. The way that it works is that each person running has a group of electors and is counted by the congress to find out who is winning in the campain. It consiswts of 538 electors ,majority of 270 of the electoral votes are required to elect the president your state entittled allotment of elctors to help in the campain. They get one in the house of represntivies and two senators.
I think that keeping the electoral college is what we need nothing is wrong with the system since our fore fathers were around so why change it now. It says that each canidate has the option to pick his/her electors to be in for the election. Then on every fourth year after the first monday in november on tuesday the president is elected. But before they get there they go to each state saying there speeches and hopin that the majority of that state votes for them because most states use a "winner takes all" were if you get the majority you get the whole states vote.
But if thats not enough then maybe this is why we should keep the electoral college. Even if Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole,and the U.S chamberer of comerce say its wrong and Al Gore. But i think it should stay because it was the best and easiest way to figure out who should be elected for president/vice president. Because even with speculations that its unfair they have no liable proof that it is.
But these speculaters dont understand that they are choosing the president and the electors before the vote of the president. They only see it happen one time since 1888 and everything goes crazy becuase gore was more popular and bush had more electoral votes and bush won even if gore was more popular. In 2012 when obama was elected over romney with a 61.7 to 51.3 because that almost all the states were using the electoral college all or nothing. In order for that one canidate to be elected the person needs to have a trans-regional vote for say romney only had the south thosw are not enough votes to win over the north and south. The canidates are mostley going for the "swing states" because they listen to the whole campain and decide who they think deserves it through there campain. Larger staes get way more attention becasue they are worth more points to the election. They try to avoid run off elections because they are shot out of the water that way with casts as low as the mid 40's in percentage.
Thats why i think the elctoral college deseres to stay. Not because al gore got mad cause he was favorite and still lost but over all i think that just because thats omething bad happend one time does not mean that the whole thing has to go down in flames. Like i said we need to keep it we have had it since the 1800's and there is literally nothing whrong with it so those are my reasons on why the ellctoral college should stay. | 2 |
The author didnt support this claim very well. The author talked alot about the dangers in Venus rather the good that comes from Venus. I say this because as I am reading I see how the author mentions many of times how Venus has extreme tempetures and how no one has went to Venus because of these extreme conditions.
The author says in paragraph 2 ,"Numerous factors contribute to Venuss reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study, despite its proximity to us." Which gives the idea that it is a very dangerous place. You may begin to question "Why would any one want to go to Venus" or you may say to yourself "This is not any where that i would want to go." The author also states in paragraph 3," Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venuss atmosphere." This is even more if a danger sign. No one would want to be anywhere where you could potentially suffocate. We also know from this paragraph that Venus temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. The author states in paragraph 6 ,"Therefore, scientists seeking to conduct a thorough mission to understand Venus would need to get up close and personal despite the risks." The author gives us tons and tons of reasons why it is not worth going to Venus.
From what I have read today I will never want to go to Venus. The author gave plenty of good reasons on why we should not go to Venus. It is not a place for humas as we have already read. So i feel as if the author did not do a good job supporting his claim on why Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it may present. | 2 |
There is many different advantages to limiting car use. The most important advantage to with this experiment is less gas emissions exit the exhaust pipes and cause greenhouse gases. This is a major advantage because our economy is filled with so much pollution and can and has caused serious damage to our health. The Environmental Protection Agency is promoting many car reduced communities. Paris, France enforced a driving pan to clear its air of smog and toxic gases. Any motorist who got caught driving was forced to pay a fine of $31. If refusal to pay the fine came to, The drivers car was impounded. The main cause of this smog in Paris was caused by diesel fuel. Diesel vehicles make up 67 percent of vehicles in Europe.
Another main benefit from car and driving reduction is exercise. Instead of driving people can ride a bike, walk, jog or even run to get to their destination. In Bogota, Columbia there is a program that is possible to spread to other countries. Millions of Columbians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during a car free day. In America studies show people are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses each year. This can help stop the obesity rating not only in the U.S. but also in many other countries.
Finally, Another advantage is people can save a whole lot more of money each week, month, and year. People of every country spends hundreds of thousands of dollars if not millions on their car. Whether it is for gas or buying a completly new car, People are consistently spending hard earned money on something that can be avoided with a nice relaxing walk. With citizens not spending money on these so called "necessities", they will be able to buy more important things. For example, Many people will be able to purchase a newer home instead of living in a weekly rent pay of an apartment. This can give many people the feeling of accomplishment and the feeling of control over their life. They will also be able to purchase food and drink so they don't starve or dehydrate. Many people go hungry everyday and suffer from dehydration. With vehucles gone people can save the necessary money needed for more life saving things. | 3 |
The face on Mars is just a natural landform. The reason why I am convinced that it is a natural ladform is because the Viking 2 saw a shadowy likeness of a human face. They saw an enormous head nearly two miles from end to end that seemed to be staring back at the cameras from a region of the Red Planet called Cydonia.
Another reason why you should believe that the face on Mars is real is because the Jet Propulsion Lab saw the face on their motor. The said it looked like an Egyptian Pharoah.
NASA unveiled the image for people to see. The people were fascinated. That's when they really thought it was a natural landform. When they looked at it, they saw a human head. It was the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth.
The "Face on Mars" has become popular. It is now in films, magazines, books, talk shows, and haunted grocery stores. The face on Mars is a natural landform. Many people have experienced the face that appears on the planet of Mars.
In conclusion, the story about the face on Mars being a natural landform is true. The face was created on it's own. Take the wonderful trip to see the face on Mars. Enjoy! | 1 |
The author of this story does not support his claim that Venus is worth exploring in a good way.
By using a problem- solution method he clearly and completely decribes an issues with exploring and studying
Venus then expalins a possible solution for said issues. But the author does not actually support his idea describing how the knowledge of Venus would be worth the risk.
In " The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author gives good substantial reasons to support studying Venus by presenting a risk then simply giving an innovation that would atleast reduce the risk. As shown in the text the author states an issue such as " ...the planet's surface temperatures average over 800 degrees Farenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet."
The author continues going on by saying the conditions are far more extreme than anything humans would encounter and how conditions are extremely inhospitable. So he clearly states one problem with studying Venus and all the risks that come along with that problem but then he explains an innovation to reduce the risks. After describing all the risks and dangers in the paragraphs before hand the author then says " NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would all scientists to float above the fray." Then he goes into descriptive detail about how this innovation would work. The author continues using the problem-solution through several of his paragraphs to answer many questions one could have about studying Venus.
Throughout the story he continously talk about innovation and imagination and how with these things we could find a safer way to study Venus but he never actually says how the information will be beneficial or used. In most of the praagraphs the author states the extremely harsh and uninhabitable conditions of Venus. Then he explains how to get around those dangers but does not explain what we gain from knowing and learning about these exact conditions. As the reader it would be more compelling if he added more detail about how this would be useful and worth it depsite the dangers Venus presents,but insatead he only talks about how to get there.
Althought the author did a good job with presenting the risk and fixing those risk but he did not quite express how it would all be worth it in the end. But in the end the prompt was about how studying Venus is a worthy pursuit and there was not a lot of content on that in this piece of writing. So the author did not support this idea very well. | 3 |
I think driverless cars could be very helpful and useful at times. There is many different positives and negatives on this subject and they are worth looking in to. I honestly dont think this is the safest way to go because computers can easily malfunction.
In paragraph 7, they mention that the driver needs to stay alert in traffic jams and scenerios that need human skill. I feel like people wouldn't be as alert if the car was doing all of the work. If people were in full control at all times, then i think there would never be a need to slack.
Driverless cars could be easier but I just can't see it being safe anytime soon. I personally feel like this invention would be more fun than safe and a part of me feels like way more accidents will occur with driverless vehicles. If they do release this car, I will just stick to a regular honda or something simple. | 1 |
I believe this idea of having self driving cars is not a good idea because, you have to be alert at all times while in this type of car, human skill is going to be needed at times while in these cars and because, its just simpliy a watse of time and money on the manufactuar´s part.
In the story it talks about how self driving cars will change the world and all but, as I see it its all still the same as if you drove the car yourself. In paragraph two it clearly stats that the passanger in self driving cars still has to stay alert at all time just incase complicated traffic issuses are happining. What good does having a self driving car if you have to be alert with it as if you were driving the car yourself.
On top of having to be alert at all times while in these cars. You as a passanger will be needed during complicated traffic issues and roadwork or accidents. I understand that these cars can only do so much as far as tachnology goes but, as I see it they really are not changing anything. In paragraph 7 it tells the reader that self driving cars can function up to speeds at 25 miles per hour but, what about if you are on a highway where cars usually have to go around 40 miles per hour what will the car do then? Its pointless to continue with this research because, the things that the driver would want these self driving cars to do are not able to be done with these cars. Just an example is most human drivers have hard curves and turns while driving self driving cars are not able to do this. This is why its just a waste of time and money.
My last reason why I believe self driving cars are not worth the effort is because of the time and money that is being wasted with these cars. The story clearly states that they have been working with self driving cars since 2009. Its been 7 years in this process of making what is being called a driverless car and to be
honest with you I am not seeing enough pros in this research to want to be on their side on wanting to develople self driving cars. On top of them being in this procees for 7 years I can not imagine the amount of money companies are wasteing with this process. I can promise that test drives for these types of cars are not cheap and in paragraph two is says that they have drivin more than half of a million miles with this self driving car. the only pro to that is that it has all been without accedent.
Who knows maybe in the future they will accomplish making a well developed self driving car but, as I said I do not believe this is a good idea. Much more can be said with the proper imformation but, in the long run companies are just wasteing their time and money in making something that will take years and years to perfect and by then what good will it do. One mistake with the car malfunctioning and all their time work and money will be down the drain. | 3 |
Google has had cars that could drive independently since 2009 under certain conditions . Driverless cars would have a huge impact in our world today with both a positive and negative affect. Google cofounder Serger Brin belives that the future of driveless cars a form a future of public taxi system. This would have a postiive affect because the cars would half of the fuel of todays taxi and would more flexible than a bus. Driverless cars are coming soon and has been used before, these will soon be able to help us and change the world, they will soon change the way we look at cars today.
Google cars have been known to drive more than half a million miles without a crash . This showes that they are safe but arent completly driveless. The use of driverless cars beneifits use because they arent driverless in certain conditions. These are arent driverless and require the use of the driver conditions like pulling in and out of driveways, getting through complicted traffic issue, and getting through road work. This will have a negative affect because they should be able to work under all condition of driving. Driverless cars can have negative aspect and positve aspect on the driving laws . In a negative way these cars cant function in certain areas and this can disrupt driving , it is also illgeal to even test computer driven cars in most states, and in a postive way these are allowed to be tested in most states and upgraded to the point of the driver can receive alters to notify them on things.
In 2016 Telsa has projected the use of a computer driven car, with 90 percent of autopilet driving system an used most of the time. otyher cars like Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan have pakned to relase the version of a computer driven car in 2020. These cars a ere soon to realese and they will help with many driving difficulties that we encounter today. This will have a positive outcome in our world. | 2 |
In this essay I will be explaining reason from my own point of view and from the story on why I do not think that these kind of vehicles should be created. I will give and back up my reasons on why I disagree with the making of these cars and also state items that were adressed in the passge that I agree with on why these type of cars should not be manufactured.
I disagree that these type of vehicles should be created for many reasons. The main reason is safety. Sure the cars will be able to drive by them selfs at time but that doesn't mean that they will never make mistakes. On a rainy day say you have the car drive by itself for a bit and you just lean back and relax for an hour or two. At any point between the 1 to 2 hours that car could say malfunction and crash hurting you and any other person inside that care. Weither it is just a little fender bender with another car or you total both of the cars and critically injure someone. My secondary reason is explained in the passage we were given to write about. Technology in cars has been growing in cars for the past couple of years varly rapidly. But as the author of the passage states the technology may not always be reliable of efficient in situatuions. The author also states that they car will have the human driver take control if coming to a constructuin site or a school crossing. What if at this time the human driver fell asleep while letting the car drive itself and doesnt tkae conrtol of the car at the correct time and crashes or hurts somebody.
Another reason I disagree withthe making of these kinds of vehicles is also explained in the passage. In paragraph 7 the author states something that I agree with completely. The author states in this paragraph that say someone let their car start to drive by itself and gets into an accident with another car. WHo is to blame for the accident, the human driver or the manufacturer who built the automatci driving system in the car? If you ask me I would have to say both the human driver and the car manufacture's are to blame. The human driver is to blame because if he or she were to be paying attention to what was going on around them they would have been able to react and see the oncoming car and could have possibly been able to avoid collision with the other vehicle.
Tyring to make cars more technology efficient is going to become a big concernin the furtre I think. Now a days we have things like the in-car phone system which myself and the author of the passage find to be very helpful and adds a little bit better percentage to teh safety of drivers when they are not trying to text and talk on their cell phones while driving. Adding this like self driving and automated brakes to cars can cause more safety issuses because they might not always work every time you try to use them.
Thoughout this essay you will find reason form myself and the author that i agree with on why we think that cars should be less automated as possible and the reliablitiy of human drivers should be more promising than technology trying to do it for use. | 3 |
"The Challenge of Exploring Venus," is an article written by someone who is arguing that Venus is a worthy exploration, despite the fact that it is highly dangerous. The author's claim was strong, and the points were valid. They included many different supported statements, and facts, and arguments that support their case very well.
Throughout the article, the author gives many different statements that help support their statement that Venus is worth the risk. In paragraph 2, the author discusses all the qualities and characteristics that make Venus an ideal planet to study. Venus is most similar to Earth by means of size and density, and at times, the closest in distance. In paragraph 4, further evidence is put forth. Paragraph 4 discusses the interest scientists have in exploring Venus. It states, " Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." Scientists believe Venus might have once been covered in oceans, which could have easily supported some sort of life. The author included that evidence to show readers that Venus might hold questions many scientists want answers to. The author wants the reader to think more into the exploration of Venus and all of the positive outcomes it could bring us.
The author supported their statements and claims adequatley. For each point the author made, they they gave factual evidence that backed up their point. Each statement was legitamate. For instance, one of the author's points was made in paragraph 5. The author uses an idea from NASA to back up their claim. It states, "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of venus would allow scientists to float above the fray." NASA is working on ways to put explorers on Venus, and the author uses that to help further his claim that Venus should be explored, dangerous or not. The author gives so many points and outside evidence that their claim is more than supported. | 3 |
Scientists have been studying Venus for generations, wondering what could possibly be on a planet so close to ours. Now that we don't have to wonder anymore, NASA will try to take it one step higher. They want to be as close to Venus' ground as possible, without dying.
Their plans are to use a blimp-like vehicle that will withstand the great amount of pressure and heat. It will fly thirty miles above the Venusian landscape, avoiding any ground conditions that would do them harm. It would still be 170 degrees F., but they would have an abundance of solar energy, and the radiation woud not exceed Earth levels.
However, in order to learn all there is about Venus, you would have to go onto Venus. This is almost an impossible task though. There are many dangers on Venus, including sulfuric acid rain and an atmosphere of nintey seven percent carbon dioxide. Hovering over it would be useless. In paragraph six, it states, "... peering at Venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere, rendering standard forms of photography and videography ineffective." This states that by hovering on top of the planet, they can't learn anyting they don't already know.
My honest oppinion on this topic is that we should not be exploring Venus right now. We just don't have the right technology for it right now. We need to wait however many years before we can officially explore our sister planet. Trying to figure out its secrets now would just be a waste of time, money, and possibly lives. We shouldn't risk a human being just because this planet used to be like ours millions of years ago. | 2 |
One day when they were seing how to lande they spoted a face on the red planet mars. It all started like this there were viking 1 was looking for a clear space so his siter viking 2 could lande in the planet mars. So they were looking with the ship camaro to see for a clear spot when they spoted some thing looking straight at the camara and they took a picture because they dint knew what it was. So when they got back home they took a copy of it so the scientist could see what it was. Then when they were looking at it the said it was a face and then everyone started asking queestion.
Also the it wasent the body it was just a humen head with"form shadows given illisuin in eye its nose and mouth". So when they saw it had all the stuff they whent back to se it again whe the misioon was over for the viking 1 and viking 2 .Also this time there camara system was way beter then imn 1988 so they took some more photographgs .Then when they came back they kept on studieng it even more and it took them aloong time to figer it out untile whan day the finally knew what it was. So they setteld a miting for everyone come back in one place and when everyone was ready the scientist said that it was just the dust that had made a pile of mountin making it look like it was a humen face so they said it was just a natural landform. So when that hapend every one was bumed because they thought that they had actully found live in a nother planet called the red planet.
So everyone was happie because they actully thought they found live in mars but the dint. After that they just left the mission stuff were they were because they were sad because there was no live they just left every thing were it was. So what the picture actully shwode was the martin equivalent of a butt or mesa land forms common around the american. After all that hapend the whole story was about the face and mars and if there was live. | 1 |
I personally, think that it would be a bad idea to use this kind of technology in shools to help students learn. This is mainly because of errors that the computer could make, or other outside factors. If the program makes changes to the lesson due to facial expressions alone, then it would make an unbelievable amount of mistakes. In case you still aren't sure what im getting at ill explain in more detail below.
First lets just ignore the outside factors and I'll talk about just the flaws of it telling emotions based completely off of facial expressions. Im sure that I am not alone in saying that no matter how I'm being taught I will, without a doubt, be bored. If It detects this then it will try to switch to a way of teaching that it thinks that I will enjoy. The problem, however, comes when I'm bored with that way as well. Because it would keep switching, it would be almost impossible to learn anything due to the program changing how the lesson is tought every five minutes.
Now lets ignore the problems with the facial recognition not working properly, and focus on the outside factors that would make putting this in our schools a disaster. Lets say that you hate a the way it is currently teaching the lesson. Then out of nowhere you see PROPER_NAME over in the corner fall out of his chair and smile, meanwhile your computer is sitting there thinking, "Oh boy, the human really likes it when I teach this way!" and decides to teach like that more often. Well now that kid is stuck learning that way until the program can take a hint and change it. Now lets explore the opposite effect. Lets say that the program has been doing an amazing job teaching you, but your cat died yesterday so you are verry sad. The Program now thinks that it is doing a bad job teaching you and decides to cross that method of teaching off of the list and try another one. Now you aren't learning as well as you could be otherwise.
In conclusion, I think that it would be a horrible idea to utilize this technology in our school systems. With even one of the errors that I mentioned it would be a bad idea, but with both of them happening at once they would practically be destroying the students' educations. | 2 |
In the article making mona lisa smile by Nick D'Alto talks about how this new technology can read a humans emotion .and i think the new technol can be used durinh class to tell how a student is feeling .not only can it be used during schools it can be used outside of school to.the new technology can solve many other problems in education and personal problmes .
i support this idea because teacher can used the new technology to take students that don't get the lesson that there are being teached can be help out by the teacher because some students are afread to ask , The new technology can also help the teacher know what lesson is working and what lesson is not.as written in the articel pf makink mona lisa smile in paragraph " a class rom computer could recoginize when a student is
becoming cofused or bored '' which could help the teachers modifiy the lesson ,like an effective human instructor this technology can improve the way we learn and make students more intrasted on learning new things that could impacted many other schools grades
new technology that reads emotions not only can help improve education but it can also help use bulit relationship between students and teachers which can casuse less problems in schools like cheating ,fight ,get kicked out of schools ,drugs and copying .it can also help students with personal problmes that they may be expericeing that effected there education and life style by reading there emotions with the new software to help the student fell good about ther problems weather is bulling or some other type of problems this new softeware can improve reationship and edducation no matter what .
i support this soft ware not only becasue it can improve eduation and relationships but also becasuces it helps out a student ,family member or even a friend in there life to make a right decicion by read there emotions and adtitude to a
person which they can fixe ther emotions that impacts there class mate and teacher
not useing the soft ware would be a big mistake becasue there would be nothing to know how a student is felling about school and what lesson are not work there would also be no major impacted in education growing | 2 |
Driverless Cars would be a great thing to have in the future or bad thing in the futrue. It doesn't allow for many mistakes to occur because of the fact that the car is drivning itself. Th only possible problems are when the driver does have to control the car, he or she will not be ready and the car will crash. However the car will not crash on its own causing less crashes and less opputunites for cars to crash. In my experience with driving, there are numerous amounts of people who cannot drive properly, this will limit the amout of driving the person actually has to do, causing less problems to occur. However the price of the car and all of it gadgets is a serious issue. It is to assume most people cannot afford something that high tech. I think this will cause more problems in the aspect of drinking and driving because people will see it as they aren't driving so it is okay, when in relaity it is not okay. I see driverless cars be a horrible idea in the future becasue all the senors needed for the car to work, and the lawsuit issues with the driver or manufactuer problem.
All of the senors needed for the car to work can be an issue. What happens if one of the senors malfunctions and doesn't work, what happens to the car. The car most likely will either not work and become a regular car. "Position-estimaitng senots on the left rear wheel, a rotating mirror, four automotive rada senors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor. The most improtant bt of technology in this system is teh spinning senor on the roof, Dubbed LIDAR." These are just the beginning of the senors needed for the car to work. The likeihood of something breaking is high and the price to repair that one piece will mostly likely be high as well. If the Dubbed LIDAR wasn't to work then the car wouldn't be able ot preform properly, and cause more accidents, injurys, and even deaths then what is currently happening today.
The complacations betweem whose at fault, the dirver or the manufactuer, as well as the legal state of the car in states, is a serious problems that the Driverless car cannot, for the most part control. "In most states it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars." It isn't even legal in most states to practice this car. Obviously the car isn't the safest as of right now, in 10 20 years maybe, but now in present times no. Also whose is at fault if someone is to crash, the driver or the manufacturers. The driver is preconcevied to beleive that the car drives on its own, so they won't brother ot even try to drive the car properly. However the manufacturer feel as though they were warnerd so it's the drivers fault. Hosently the whole situation is confusing, but one way to solve the problem is the elimante the cause of the problems, the Driverless car.
I see driverless cars be a horrible idea in the future becasue all the senors needed for the car to work, and the lawsuit issues with the driver or manufactuer problem. There are too many problems still witht he car, that is not to say that inthe future maybe, but I just don't see it happening. The idea seems like a good idea but it is just something cannot be carried out properly, and that is the number one problem with the car. I would like to see the car be successful but i just won't happen, with some serious steps taken. Once the car is fully Driverless and no work by the driver is needed then the car will be successfull but until then it will not work. | 3 |
"The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangerous it presents. I think the author supports it's idea ok but not enough for somebody to risk their life to go and study it. The author really doesn't use that many details for this idea.
Venus is one of the brightest points of light in the sky right? So why wouldn't you wanna go and study venus I know I would. That's why the author want you to go study it. He is basically telling you all this information about Venus and all these stuff it has. Like,I didnt even know venus was aa planet until I saw it in the text."Venus is actually a planet". Exploring venus is life risking cause its so close to the sun but also close to Earth.
The author really give alot of supports about studying venus in the text. Lik he really only talked about a venus is close to earth and thee sun. He doesnt really give good supports to his idea. But also the author is giving som supports on how its worthy to study. Like nobody has ever actually stayed alive on venus more than a few hours on venus so what if you do you would be the first to ever alive on venus more than a couple hours hours. Would you wanna take a chnce of your life to visit venus?
In my conclusion I actually think the author can get away with this for other readers to go and study venus. Even though he gives a little supports but not enough. | 1 |
Facial action coding system is a system that is able to tell emotions on the faces of anyone who gets scanned by it. They're classified by: happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness.
For a student, a facial action coding system, to be able to tell your emotions is probably something that most students do not want. It would probably make most students uncomfortable for a machine to watch their faces to be able to tell what they're feeling. But in a teachers way of seeing this. It can prove valueable to help him or her out with the student and teach them in a certain way that makes the student feel happier or they figure out whats wrong with the student.
Some evidence for this is. "A classroom coputer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." They could then modify the lesson for the student and provide more focus in a certain area. Say the studnt was confused and the teacher never knew he was confused because he never really showed it to the teacher. Well this system can do that and be able to tell the teacher that he needs help.
In the end Facial Action Coding System is a great way to help out teachers and make their job a little easier to be able to improve their lessons and make the student smarter. But students like my self wouldn't want a machine to watch them, while im doing their work, and tell the teacher what they're feeling. It would make the student want to hide their emotions even more. Plus you wouldn't want the teacher to know what you're feeling because you could get in trouble if its something bad. | 2 |
Venus is a very dangerous place for human to be on. Its surface temperature is over 200 degrees and the pressure is more than 90 times greater than that of Earth's. Even though the conditions are very bad for human beings, many scientists believe that it will be worth it to make trips to the planet to get research. In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author makes a claim that the pursuit of studying venus is wirth it despite the dangers it brings and supports it well by showing why we could benefit from the research and how we could possibly survive the harsh conditions.
In the article the author supports the claim that they made by giving reasons to why we should study the planet and what we can learn from it. In the article it states "Long ago, venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." Later in the article it says "Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth." These quotes from the text show that the planet probably resembled earth a long time ago and still has some similar features that Earth also has. Scientists could use this information to find new discoveries and learn more about Venus and maybe even Earth itself.
Also the author tells the reader that there could possibly be a way for use to get close to the planet without anybody being harmed and still get valuable research. The article states "Imagine a blimp-like vehicle havering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape. Just as our jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way." Also in the text it states "Solar power would be plentiful and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." These quotes show that the author tell the readers that there is a way for us to get close to Venus, be safe, and still gather information.
To sum it all up, the author develops and supports his claim, "going to Venus would be worth it despite the dangers it presents," well by giving reason to why we should study it and how we could study the planet and it still be safe for humans to survive the harsh conditions that Venus has. The author uses facts that support his idea that humans might be able to survive the conditions with the right tools. The author also tells the reader why scientists could benefit from the research they can gather from studying Venus. | 3 |
There have been conspiracy theories going around that the Face on Mars is actually created by aliens, but it can be proven to everyone that the claims are false. The Face is simply a natural landform, and NASA is not trying to hide or distort the truth. Some may still be skeptical, but there is proof that the Face is not an alien monument of any sort.
As stated before, the Face is actually a natural landform. It's the Martian equivalent to a butte or mesa found commonly in the American West. Fellow researcher, Jim Garvin, even states that it reminds him of the "Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho"(paragraph 12). It can be proven that Earth landforms definitely aren't made from aliens, and the same could be said for the Face.
The Face isn't even an actual face, so it's unlikely it even is an alien monument. The only reason the rock formation resembles a face is because the shadows cast an illusion of facial features such as eyes, a nose, and a mouth. Pictures of the Face were captured two other times using the camera's absolute maximum resolution. Skeptics may believe that NASA messed up somewhere or that something was flawed, but it is highly unlikey that this is true. The procedure was performed on a cloudless summer day with the best camera at NASA's disposal.
Some skeptics may still doubt that the Face wasn't created by aliens, believing that NASA is just attempting to hide the evidence of an ancient civilization. In truth, this is false, but many defenders of the NASA budget wish there were signs of alien life. How can one believe NASA is keeping secrets about alien life from the public when it would benefit to do the opposite. Proof of an alien civilization would be more helpful to share than hiding it, so why do people believe otherwise?
Whether or not people believe the Face is actual just a Martian landform, it doesn't affect the researchers of NASA. Evidence to support the claim has been provided, but what proof do the skeptics have? Can they really disprove the truth or are they just desperate for attention? | 3 |
Has anyone ever noticed that face shaped rock in Mars? Well back in 1976, some NASA Vikings saw a rock in Mars. They were all talking about it and wanted to know what it was. They told a few people and scientists. They came to a conclusion and made some guesses about what it was. Some said it was an alien's face and some said it was a man's face. It is now 2001, and the argument is currently still going on. Now I'm going to tell you from my perspective whats going on now.
So I'm a scientist, I'm currently in outerspace with other astronauts. We see what everyone is talking about. It does look like a face. From people's opinion it looks like an alien made the face, a real person, and other exotic ideas. Honestly from my opinion it looks like the natural planet. Of course it looks like a face, but I don't think a man or an alien just came and stuck their face in the planet. Like come on people, let's be real.
It is now October 24, 2002. Today we go back up into space, we go back in 3 hours. Right now I'm having a conversation with one of the astronauts, John, he thinks an alien made the face. This is what he asks me "How could you not think that is an alien's face?" My response: "Because the face is no where near shaped like an alien's face. There probably is life on that planet, but their face isn't in the planet." His response: "Oh come on, that is totally an alien's face." My response: "Look at the the way the face looks, it doesn't look anything like an alien." His response: " Well if it's not an alien then what do you think it is?" My response: "I think that was just naturally formed there."
His response: "How so?" My responese: "Look at the picture, it looks natural. Also, you know all of those big wholes in the earth, they were naturally formed, no one just came an dug that big of a whole in the earth. If so, they would probabbly be stuck inside the whole." His response: "You might be right, but that still doesn't convince me that the face was naturally formed." Then I said "Okay John, how did the alien's face get in the planet? The ground there looks awfully hard. So I don't think it would be possible for anyone or anything to make a face print in it."
"I don't know how, the alien does know." Then I said "Exactly you don't know how it got there. The alien does, if he did it. All I can say for myself is that the alien didn't do it, nor a man. I believe that it was naturally formed. So I'll let you think what you want to think." A few hours later, after him thinking about it, he came to the conclusion that maybe it was naturally formed. | 3 |
Using this technology to reads students expressions in the classroom is not valuable. I don't thinks its valuable becuase a student could be feeling mad or sad and by the teacher knowing that could ask the student what is wrong. Although there is nothing wrong with asking that the student themselves may want to be left alone. It also a I feel like violates a sense of privacy. I don't think students will want a camera staring at them in the classroom. It seems like the technology uses cameras and that makes some parents uncomfortable with the idea of it. The technology seems to be a thing used for scientific purposes not classroom usage for teachers. The article say the software could detect when a student is bored. Teachers could avoid this by trying to keep the lesson exciting and interesting. A teacher should be able to read a students facial expressions without the help of a computer program. Although yes it could help a teacher more it seems a lot less practical. I say this because the teacher could need to open up a computer or something along those lines. Upon opening up the program the teacher would have to check each and every students emotions based upon their facial expressions. Another thing wrong I see wrong with this is, what if a student does not really feel down or mad and the software miscalculates it. Some people have a resting that just looks mad. They may not be mad but they seem like they are. In conclusion I do not think this software will be usable in classroom setting for my points listed above. The idea of it sounds good but the excution is not the best. | 1 |
Do you think
the Facial Action Coding System should be used for student ? I think the Facial Action System should be used for students because the computer can recognize when
a student is becoming confused
bored ,
Helps the computer undersatnd you , and students pay more attention totechogy.
If the students can use the Faical Action Coding System if can tell if the student is bored or confused . The computer can modify the lesson to help the student understand the lesson . If the
student is confused he/she wont learn
anything from the lesson.
The computer can modity if the student is bored and the computer can give the student an more fun or undertanding lesson.
If an student is bored . If an student is bored with the lesson he/she will not learn anything .
If the students use this technology the computer will be able to understand the stundent.
Say a student is having a hard time with the lesson
the
computer can help the stundent . It states in the passage that " Most humans communication is nonverbal , including emotioanls communication , " notes Dr. Huang. It also states "if you smile when a web appears on your screen , a simlar ad might follow . But if you frown ,the next will be different .
Another reason
why computer need to understand you.
Facial Action System should be used for alot of students because most students pay more attention to technolgy. Why not help
the student learn with this new technology it will help the learn more . Student can learn more and have help
if they dont understand the computer can try to show the lesson in different ways for the student. The computer can teach the student like an effective human instrutor. Student can and will learn more with this new techology.
This is why I thing this techology should be used to help
students learn
because it helps the student understand more, pay attiention more , and learn more with the Facial Action System. | 2 |
"What is the
Electoral college?
In the history, talk electoral college. The electoral college consists of the selection of the eletors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for president and vice president, and the couting of the electoral votes by congress.
also, the electoral cogelle consists of 538 electors. a majority of 570 electoral votes is requiered to elect the president.
According with the test, i agree because all the candidates generally hace responsabilities . so, they need to demostrate to the people that them can have good ideas for the state. then the people need to have a vote for the best candidate for that can pass to be the new president of the state. each candidate have many obligations with the state the obligation president is better the state. one "evidence is each candidate running for president in your state has his or her own group of electors"
in conclusion, i think that is good be president of a state but a president have many obligations that to accomplish. | 0 |
In deciding on who will be in charge of our nation for four years, the people should be able to choose who they want and not be giving the decision to 538 people from the Electoral College when there are millions of people in the United States of America. The Electoral College should be removed because it is not fair to the people and the Electoral College is not organized. By changing the electon to a win by popular vote, people can ensure its them deciding the future. Who knows how many times a candidate as president has won a state but it wont even count because the Elctoral College decides another.
An Electoral College is unfair to the people voting. Although changing it may be something shocking because of how long we have had it, like in passage 2 paragraph 14 it is "outdated and irrational." For example, as said in paragraph 11 of source 2, when the author states that some Electors haver voted for who THEY want instead of their party's candidate. This shows that the Electoral College can be fraud or fake. Who knows if we dont stop it now, what if the number of Electors that do that go up, our nation could depend on this. That's another thing. Our president affects how our nation is treated for 4 years and maybe even 8 if they are voted into office again. Why leave a big decision on a coupld hundred people when there are millions waiting to get their right to choose.
A second reason to remove the Electoral College, is that it is not organized. If we remove them, we can avoid the messiness of elections where no candidates gets the majority votes as said in passage 3 paragraph 22. Another example is in source 2 paragraph 10, when stated that when people are voting for the presidents electors, many get confused and end up voting the wrong person. That can be big issue and is caused because of the unorganization of the Electoral College. This can be prevented by letting the popular vote of the people count instead of Electors.
In conclusion, the Electoral College is something that was successful in the past. If we start now we can slowly remove them, and head into a fair presidential election by letting the popular vote of the people decide who is president. Our president should be someone the majority of the people agree with, and not people who are willing to go with whoever they want instead of the majority of the state they represent. | 3 |
Ding! Ding! Ding! The bell has now rung and you must take your seat. Class is beginning. Here goes another day of zoning out and being bored for seven hours!
New software has been developed, the Facial Action Coding System, and it can detect your emotions. The Facial Action Coding System being in the classroom would be very valuable!
This technology being in classrooms would be beneficial for many reasons. In the passage Dr. Huang predicts,"A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." This shows how the Facial Action Coding system could help the students learn. By being able to know if the student is not understanding or getting bored, the computer can now review what the student is confused about and make a different approach on how they are giving the student information.
Knowing what people's emotions are is very important when it comes to communicating and teaching them new things. In the text Dr. Huang says, "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication. So computers need to understand that too." This shows that because of emotion's being a big part of communicating and understanding things, computers should know what people are feeling as well. This will make computers even more helpful than they already are. In addition, the computers won't have a hard time being able to recognize these emotions! According to the article,"The facial expressions for each emotion are universal, even though individuals often show varying degrees of expression." This shows how even though many people show their emotions in different ways, your face muscles do similar things for you to be able to tell each expression. The passage also says," They even indicate the difference between a genuine smile and a forces smile." This proves how the software is really aware of how you're feeling.
All of this can show why the Facial Action Coding System would be very valuable in the classroom. Hopefully now you would like this new software in classrooms at your own school! Ding! Ding! Ding! The day is now over, but because of the new software you have in your class, the Facial Action Coding System, you felt excited to come back tomorrow to have another amazing day of learning without being bored and understanding everything! | 3 |
Hello welcome, come join the merry crew of the Seagoing Cowboys. Yes, we got every thing you need from fun adventures, get to help people, and to friendly crew mates. So, come join us for some fun!
Fun adventures are what you need. "The cattle-boat trips were an unbelieveable opportunity for a small-town boy," says Luke a Seagoing Cowboy. Luke toured an excaved castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal on his way to China.
It was 1945, World War 2 was over in Europe, and many countries were left in ruins To help these countries revcover their food supplies, animals, and more, 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA (the United Nations Relief and Rehabiliation Administration). That's when we stepped into the fight to help others survive.
The crew also found time to have fun on board, especially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded By playing games and having little tournaments with one another. So if your playful but responsable , you'll fit right in.
So by helping others please join the Seagoing Cowboys. With all it's good resons you will find a spot thats good for you. Help make a difference in the world of war and conflict. Join the helpful hand of Seagoing Cowboys and the U.N.R.R.A. (the United Nations Relief and Rehabiliation Administration). | 1 |
The idea of a driverless car has always been the goal set for future technology. This is seen in the constant stream of futuristic movies or shows. However, those only convey the positive and idealistic aspects of such vehicles. The ignorance of the negative information associated with them causes a personal disbelief in the cars. Driverless cars should not be developed due to the overwhelming evidence including that development/testing is against the law in the majority of the world due to the idea of possible malfunctions or irresponsible road behavior from the passengers.
A vast majority of people agree that testing should not occur due to possible danger. The article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" speaks about how traffic laws are currently written to include human control of the vehicle in Paragraph 9. Furthermore, it talks about how limited the allowance of testing is. With a large scale rejection of such ideas it is wise to consider the fact that there is not just assumptions made by everyone. The article blatantly puts down the states who did not follow suit in allowing the tests. There was not any consideration of the majority possibly deciding this based on solid fact and the issues not yet addressed by the companies manufacturing the vehicles. So, the legality of the driverless cars is merely one point amongst a plethora of other issues.
One contribution to the rejection of testing is the possible malfunctions that could happen. All throughout the article the accidents in the future were expected. which is why the companies wish for the human assistance to be alert to "take over". However, when observing that statement closely the accident would be caused by the car itself due to the fact that it drove in such way. The weather could be an out of control factor involved and if the car does not drive in a way that considers that, then the fault is on the car. The same can be said for a car collision. If all of the vehicles in the world are driven by themselves, then it would be the cars that caused the collision. Paragraph 7 touches on the liability issues of situations similar to those mentioned. The issues surrounding the driverless cars are preventable by not producing them at all. That way there is no room for error when it comes to the safety of those on the road.
The manufacturers of the vehicle contradict themselves when it comes to the passengers involved. Paragraph 8 discusses making the driving fun by entertaining them. Whereas Paragraph 7 is about the driver taking over and the different functions to make them aware. The key to having the person aware of the dangerous situation is to not have them distracted in the first place. Plus that prevents any accidents if flaws in the warning system should occur. The reason there is a long lasting trust in human judgement on the road is that the people have a chance to take action quick enough. If they were not previously paying attention due to the driverless car then that chance is wasted by them attempting to figure out what the situation is in the first place. Eliminate the possibilty of that irresponsible lack of attention by having the person drive to begin with.
Driverless cars would allow too many flaws in the system and legality issues that prevent them for obtaining the title of a safter option. The manufacturers are attempting to make a car that is easier and requires less effort, but in doing so there is a plethora of issues that accompany it. The question of who is legally to blame for issues would waste time and money. During the process of development, the producers are accepting accidents as a given fact instead of trying to produce a flawless car. They are also focusing on the idea of a "entertaining car" instead of one that keeps the passengers alert for possible accidents. Therefore, there are too many arguments for safety against the vehicles to even consider mass producing them. The driverless cars are much safer on the big screen than in reality. | 4 |
I think the author does not support his reason very good because he states a lot of reasons why its bad. A couple reasons why it is a bad for example in paragraph three he says the average temperature on Venus is over 800 degrees fahrenheit and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. For the temperature being so high and the pressure being so high all we can do is be in a vehicle 30 miles up from Venus talking pictures and still the temperature from that far up would be 170 degrees farhrenheit and we could take rock samples but it would be very hard because of how hot it is. The only reason he says why its good is in paraghraph eight and he says we should explore Venus is because of human curiosity. In conclusion the author does not support the exploration of Venus very goof because he states to many facts of why its bad and to little of facts why it would be good. | 1 |
Driverless cars shouldnt be aloud. theyare dangerious, they could increse the rate for teens, increase the rate for death during a car crash, and what if the senor broke on the side of the car you wouldnt even know so you could just fly off the road.
Having a driveless care shouldnt be aloud at all. first they could increase the the rate for czr crashes in teens. the rate is already high for them expecially in Indiana and we dont even have them kind of cars yet. Cell phones are a major role to the youth in todays time. that is the main reason for so many recks today so if you give them a car that can drive its self, they are not gone do nothing but text and not pay attention to the rode at all basically if you was to do that you are setting them up fro their own death.
Second ,by not creating these kinds of car and giving them out you could be saving your company alot of money. Because if somebody was to get in a reck and they wasnt driving but the car was driving its self they gone come to the people who made the car because they feel like it was thier fault. Even tho you told them that they still had to pay attention to the rode they not cuz they feel like the car can watch its self. so if you dont put the car on the market you can save your company alont of money and alot of stress.
Third, you wouldnt wanna be the reason for any deaths, because if you start getting so many deaths on your car nobody is going to want your car so now you then wasted money on all these cars and parts for these cars that nobody is buying so you just lost alot of money and nobobody just has money to waste. If your company starts to lose money they gone have to start cutting people because they can no longer pay you, and the first person they are going to fire are the people who came up with the idea that caused them to lose so much money in conslusion i think t would be your best bet to just not make the cars because your saving money, your saving lives so now your heros, and you dont have to worry about anybody tryong to sue you for most of everything yall got because if the person win boy yall feelings gone be hurt | 2 |
Do you want to help other countries? In the process you can see, and take a tour through the ruins of great places. That's what Luke in, "A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves" did. More people should join the Seagoing Cowboys program.
If you join you would be helping countries after World War II from all over the world by, bringing them horses, young cows, and mules. You can help nations rebuild since World War II destroyed a lot of land. I know this because in the text it said, To help these countries recover their food, supplies, animals, and more, 44 nations joined together to form UNNRRA (the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration.) Some may argue that sending all of the animals overseas might reduce the animal population in that country that is sending them away. But really we have enough cattle in places like America.
Also joining will give you an oppurtunity to visit all of the ancient ruins of a great city. The author wrote, "Besides helping people, I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and China. But seeing the Acropolis in Greece was special." On the other hand people will say that they have already seen the Acropolis or China or Europe, but the countries\cities are fascinating. I think you could see them again.
Last it teaches you how to be hard working. I know this because, On the second trip Luke served as a watchman. His job was to check on all of the animals every hour, One rainy night, after making his hourly report to the captain, he slid down a slippery ladder on his backside. It teaches you something, but sometimes it's dangerous. Luke almost flew overboard into the dark Atlantic.
That was my persuasive essay, do you want to join the program now? I still think more people should join the Seagoing Cowboys program. I think that seeing the Acropolis in Greece would be amazing as well as seeing China and all of its great places. | 3 |
My opinion is that Driverless cars should not be driven on the roads because one they eventually crash after they have been driven a certain amount of miles. These cars are not even truly driverless, forexample uu have to pull them in and out of driveways take over when the car is in traffic. The driverless car is truly useless because the roads arent fit for this car unless they have have the special message Binary code, The binary code allows the car to drive on the road.
Some more reasons to why i think the car should not be driven is because the car still needs a driver. The car is illegal in most states such as, California, Nevada, Florida, And the district of Columbia. They are illegal in these staes because they are not reliably safe. In the passage it says still, even if traffic laws change new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident. If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault- the driver or the manufacturer.?
This car is not safe to pedestrians because if the car were to loose to control and the person in the car isnt able to take control quick enough then the pedestrian and the car owner would be hurt. Alas this car should not be driven because it needs too much work done on it such as, better sensors more magnetic sensors.
Inconclusin these cars should not be driven because they are dangerous and can harm somebody. They do not have all the materials this car need and they cant really be driven driverless because of all the malunfunctions which would stop people from buying the car because if they found out that the car has as many problems as it does they arent gonna want it which keeps them from recievimg money. | 2 |
The Facial Action Coding System a new technology that helps you to understand human emotions, it can calculate the movement of the major muscles of your face, it can recognize six basic emotions, and it can make a difference beetwen a real and a fake emotion
First, The Facial Action Coding System can calculate the movement of the muscles of your face, the software has a process that begins by making a model of your face in third dimension including 44 the major muscles of your face, after associate the movement of your muscles with a face that has no emotion then it know what was the movement of every muscle from its normal position to the position that has when there is a emotion.
Second, it can recognize six basic emotions, the six basics emotion that the software can recognize is: happines, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. how it works? well it recognizes every muscle and analyzes the movement that every muscle makes when you have an emotion, that means that there are predeterminated movements and the software associate the movements of your face and the prederminated movements for every emotion.
Finally, it can make a difference between a real and a fake emotion, it means that the software is capable to recognize natural movements of your face and forced movements, it is a helpful characteristic because the software cannot have a mistake when it is analyzing emotions.
In Summary, the software has enough capacitiy to recognize, the movements of your face, Recognize six emotions, difference between a real and a fake expresion, it means that it just need to add more emotions and improve the analyzing of faces and the software would be helpful. | 1 |
I am Sam ; the other NASA scientist is Robert
I am Sam Ulas and I think the "Face on Mars" is from natural landform. Because there are many peices of evidence to support my claim.
Here is one reason They have many different photos of the face they have hard to see photos from the bad quality and really good ones from good quality throught the years.
"Ok Sam they could have just made that up, the authors said, "reasoned it would be a good way to engage the public and attract attention to Mars".
"Well Robert they actually went back for a better photo in fact a ten times shaper photo than the original one".
"The camera from MGS (Mars Global Surveyor) when through wispy clouds to see the face".
"But there was a day were there was no wind on a summer day and MGS scoped in really close for a second look they to roll the spacecraft 25 degrees to center so they could see it clearly. They got a crazy good photo with absolute maximum resolution".
"Well Sam you seem to have good exidence to back up your claim so I am here to say you proved me wrong". | 2 |
There are many advantages to limiting car usage. It is better for the environment, it is safer, and it cost people less in the stuggling economy.
To begin, limiting the usage of cars is a advantage because it is better for the environment. For example, "...Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city" (Duffer). It is sad that there is so much pollution in the air that car usage has to be stopped in order for the smog in the air to decrease. After five days of smog, congestion was down by sixty percent in the capital of France. Obviously, limiting car usage is extremely better for the environment.
In addition, the less you use cars, the safer your community is. For example, Heidrun Walter "...walked verdant streets where the swish of bicycles and the chattering of wandering children drown out the occasional distant motor" (Rosenthal). Children coul not be wandering aroundif there were cars on the road. There are accidents all the time where children and adults get struck by cars even when they are trying to be safe. Obviously, if cars are not on the road, it will be safer for everyone.
Finally, limiting car usage saves people money. Actually, "...Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less, and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by" (Rosenthal). The less that cars are used, the less gas people have to pay for and so they will save their hard earned money. If people stop using their vehicles, then they will be more likely to sell the car, and then they will make money in the long run. If the trend continues, fewer and fewer people will use their money to buy cars. Clearly, limiting car usage allows people to spend less money.
To conclude, limitng the usage of vehicles as transportation is an extremely good idea because it is better for the environment, it is saer, and it costs people less money. | 3 |
Do you really want your children living in a world covered in smog and crouded streets? It is shown that all of our development sense World War II has been centered on the car and this really needs to chang.
First off studies show that passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in europe.. And those number are 4 times higher in America, the land that you are raising your children in has the highest amount of greenhouse gases on the planet right now. If we could just do what the people in Paris did we can easily fight this smog epidemc. In Paris the put a law out were people with even-numbered license plates had to leave their cars at home or the would face a $31 dollar fine. then they carried out the rule the next day for people with odd-numbered license plates. This rule cut down the congestion by almost 60 percent in the capital. And after five days of this new act the smog over paris finally left.
Also in Colombia they have a program that is some what like paris whish is having a huge turnout. Many people are saying that the car free day "is a good way to take away stress and lower air pollution". The funny part is that this event is spreading troughout the neighboring countries. This day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in the mid-1990s. and it has seen the construction of 118 miles of bike paths, which is the most amount in all Latin American city's. SO why is it takening the U.S so long to jump into this program?
The final thing we need to talk about is that even though fewer and fewer people are getting their licenses its still not enough. And even though the researchers say that "America is past its love affair with cars" its still not enough. To truely make a change people like you and me need to get up and actually do something. Even if we can't get the goverment or state to pass it. We as a community can put our own no car days into action and just start walking.
Now that you know the risks about this rising epidemic known as smog how do you feel about the way the world is looking? And how esay it would be to just fix what we have be doing such a thing as walking. But truley is this a world you want to raise your children in? | 2 |
First of all, NASA only gets their information from research and cameras which they depend on to help them with their research too. According to the text it states,"New high-resolution images and 3D altimetry from NASA's Mars Global Survey spacecraft reveal the Face on Mars for what it really is: A mesa." Well, the Face of Mars does indeed exist but there is not any proof that there was life on Mars once because it seems impossible. To add to that it has been twenty five years since the discovery, and there is not a for sure explanation that is logical because some people think there is smething behind it.
Second, now to the conspiracy theorists, they think there was life on Mars like aliens. Anything is possible for one so they can't be entirely incorrect because even a few scientists got to thinking about the Face of Mars could be an alien too. According to the text it says,"Although few scientists believed the Face was an alien artifact, photographing Cydonia became a priority for NASA when Mars Global Surveyor(MGS) arrived at the Red Planet in September 1997, eighteen long years after the Viking missions ended." Even scientists believed it too and NASA has logical thinkers in their coorporation too.
Next, on April 8,2001 they got a picture of the Face,"Malin's team captured an extraordinary using the camera's absolute maximum resolution. Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo." So overall the technology for the camera was very equiped.
Therefore, the conspiracy theorists may have some thoughts that make NASA ponder about. Such as, NASA could be lying to us all and making us to believe that there is no such thing as extra terestrial objects and such. Here are some interesting theories that government should give us answers on, is the world really round, do aliens exist, is NASA lying, is there really a so called space, could aliens be demons, and overall is the government lying and hiding a bunch of theories from us. In fact they may have those answers to our natural questions about life?
In conclusion, NASA goes by research and proven facts and conspiracy theories have nothing to back them up. There are so many questions about life and Man do not have all the answers. We do not even know of all the organisms that could be living in the ocean. We may never know these questions, but NASA goes by research, cameras, and approximations about these discoveries and us the people just have to believe in what they are telling us. | 2 |
I thinks the new technology called the Facial Action Coding System enbles computers to indenify humans emotions is good things like what the author says on paragraph 3 because that can helps the people if the computers can indentify people emotions like if they happy or sad and if it can makes people feels better if the computers help the people like taking them to a websites where they can read a story or others like playing games, listen to music and watching news that make them relaxing.
Also I thinks what the sciencetists says on paragraph 1 "Developing better ways for humans and computers to communicate", this means that they said like it better for all people if they developing a software that can recognize emotions.
Another good things about the emotion recongnition like what it says on paragraph 4 because the software can also recognize faces on a pictures.
If the new computer software that can tells people emotions, sciencetists should make them more valuable like adding more news features to it and that will make more people to like them. | 1 |
Would the use of technology to read emotional express be valuable in class?
The use of technnolgy is very useful in th classroom, it helps students with many tasks. Using tecnology to read emotional expressions would be great way of helping teachers knowing how their student feels during class or during a lession. The process of using to technology to read emotions is when a computer conducts a 3-D computer model of the face. The face has 44 major muscels that the computer memorises. Eckman has classified 6 basic emotions "happiness, surprise, anger, digust, fear, and sadness".
Most facial expressions are universal, even though many people show many kinds of emotion video imagry can track these kinds of facial movements. When you look a friends you can tell how their feeling by the look on their face. But most people struggle at describing how they feel. Using this technology at school will let teachers know if a student is having a bad day and they can help them feel better or make their day better. Classrooms can start by having a Classroom computer letting the teacher know if a student is understanding the lession by their facial expression. If most of the class show a facial expression that they are not understanding the lession the teacher may change the lesson to make sure students learn it. Most students in class room are to shy or pershaps scared to answer or question thinking they will get it wrong, with new technology teachers will know how the students feels about gettin answers wrong or feeling shy in the class room. | 2 |
Dear State Senator,
I feel as if we should have a say on who we vote for President...Am I right? But at the same time we do need a majority of votes from a Electoral College who knows a little bit more then us. That is why Im here to say that Election by popular vote for the President of the United States would be better then having a Electoral College that is most likely Segregationists vote for us.
It is said that if we would had popular votes for the President instead of Electoral College,we would most likely have a better chance of getting a President that would be the best at his country then to get someone that is just a favorite of a country of a state by segregationists,meaning someone that just like you from your race or skin color,but at the same time the Electoral College is established cause of our founding fathers as a compromise between election of the president by a vote in Congress and election of the president by a popular vote. A Electoral College is consist of 538 electors and 270 electoral votes are required to elect the President,we on the other hand,get a few people that we voted on for voting for the president and vice president,and sometimes that can be the wrong president we pick or get confused picking the wrong candidates. But I feel the people who support who we have as Presidents should be abled to have a say on what they think and feel on the President,cause after all,we need someone to look up to.
Another way that I feel the popular vote should be the best thing then the Electoral College is that in Source 2:Pharagraph 14, it explains how the Electoral College is unfair,outdated,and irrational,its like even if we won our votes then basically the Electoral College won dued to The winner-take-all system in each state. I feel this is unfair cause its basically stating that the Electoral College vote is the vote that they will accept even though we are voting to,but at the same time they have more say and know how on what we dont know about the Presidents and the Vice Presidents,but having favored seperation based on race. Source 3:phargraph 23 explains that the Electoral College method of selecting the President may turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope of carrying their state,I feel as if popular voters dont look into political preference then to just pick a vote and hope that their pick is going to be the President. The Electoral College gets into all the questions and discuss who would be the best, however, a popular vote would just be that the person is their favorite just like the Electoral College.
Mr. State Senator,If I had a choice between keeping the Electoral College or a popular Vote, I would pick a popular vote cause the Electoral College is pretty crashed and it really fair. I say give people a chance and let them vote. Picking a pedigree plurality of votes from the Electoral College then from the Popular votes isnt fair based on us. No voters vote swings a national election,and in spite of that,about one-half the eligible American population did vote in the election of 2012,as said in pharagraph 23. I think that Voting for the popular vote would be better then Electoral College cause it would be the states vote instead of just a majority of peoples vote that only want a president that is not validated for success for us. | 2 |
Dear Senator,
We should keep the Electoral College but should change some of the rules. We should have a Congress that knows best about what we should do to make our country better. They should be wise with age and should know better than to elect someone who is no good for this country. The votes should be runned by the people and they should have a say if the person running to be President or Vice President should run at all. The people have the majority vote, so they should be able to have a say. It does take longer but it is what's right.
We don't need to get rid of the Congress but we need to be better about who we put in the office to run our beautiful country. They need to come and show us who they really are. Visit a town and get them your vote. The Electoral College has done some good things in the past but we should change it. The Congress needs to be made up of people who know what is right and which canadite to choose as our President.
If you are going to be in Congress and are voting for a specific party, then you need to stay in that party. The canadite is going to feel like you betrayed them after everything they have done for you. Just because your rich doesn't make it okay to betray what's right for this country. "But each party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party's nominee (and that trust is rarely betrayed)" (In Defense of the Electoral College:Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President, Richard A. Posner). Through our troubled times, Congress has never stopped trying to make everything better. That is what this nation needs and hopes for.
Do not get rid of the Electoral College because it helps us who to choose to run our nation. Just make some adjustments and this country will be the best it can be.
Sincerely Yours, Gabriela. | 1 |
when you drive on the road and all of sudden you see a yard sale or a car for sale or anything your thinking first well let me just stop and park on the side of the road. well one thing is one you might ge ticket or in genral areas its just frobiden, but your thinking what can i do?,well when you get yuor first car maybe your thinking i can drive however i want and also where i want then on other hand you just dont care, break the rules.
To begin with in some countrys or states or anywhere in the united states some counrtys ban from alot of things when you drive. for example Paris bans driving due to smog,also if leave you car in the way of the road you fine anywhere you go in life, so you have to think before drive or do other things while your driving. Citizens use diesel fuel when they drive, some people have to,for example france they have tax policy on diesel over gasoline ,but the most percent that citizens use is diesel engines. citizens changes of different usage of things between gas and companies, but they have avantages for them and to make the better so it can be used.
Their is place called Bogota and there they have a car free day, but has beed the third year they have been banned with buses and taxis permitted for a day without a car. to begin with alot of places have banned without cars but some have not, for example to banned without a car would not be good because if have a car and cant drive it because the city is banned or the country is banned from then the bus abnd taxi and everything else is banned then your permmtted withour a car to drive,ride. people come Bogota come to see how enthusiastic they have been ,now they improvement without cars,which sounds good becasuse the mayor improving something new for them or just changing things around. now new things are starting to come in sidewalks are being replaced,they have cut traffic, new restaurants,so with everything improving then maybe cars wont banned no more restriced things maybe everything might be limting to what the mayor is saying.
Now that president Obama has been seeing whats been going on about the banning of the cars and no limiting usage, things are now starting even more with the president in the advantage,now the question is that their asking is ''has America passed peak driving" to me on ther hand it has, becasue all the commtions between things being banned and they see the usage of things, but now everything is starting to change. now people are starting to get what is their back now the ownership of their house and their payments of everything is going down. to conclude, all of the study from last year about the driving of young people has decreased by so much percent . now since everything is back to normal then things don't have to be bannned alot anymore so if they can keep the percentage down then evrything is good, if it does go down they can get usage, now they can save time improve their life they are living. | 1 |
Cars were created to transport humans to their desired destination. I see no need for driverless cars when cars were ment to be driven. Why do we need driverless cars anyway, we don't know how reliable the technology is, the driver still has to remain alert, and no one knows who to blame when someone gets hurt.
Computers crash everyday, elevators breakdown, escalators stop escalating. Technology breaksdown. If all of these things can happen everyday who's to say something like that won't happen to these cars. The brakes could stop you right in the middle of a busy intersection or the Google car wakes you only 2 seconds before you run into a semi-truck. "For the driverless car to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel", exactly they "mimic" humans which is unreliable.
What is the point of a driverless car if the human driver has to stay awake. The only reason one could see a driverless car as useful is if they were only created so that the passanger could sleep. This also means that the cars aren't equipped to handle difficult situations and if they aren't advanced enough to handle that, then they shouldn't be allowed on the streets. "The Google car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over." What if you are a deep sleeper and you don't hear the warning?. You would die, that's what would happen.
"It's your fault!" "No, it's your fault." That is what judges across the country, across the world would be hearing if the driverless car went to market and had an accident. "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault--the driver or the manufacturer?" Who is at fault, the person who made the car that malfunctioned or the person who interviened trying to save themselves and the car only to have it backfire, making things worse? This would then lead to a long trial draining both parties of a lot of money. Why would anyone put themselves through that? Just so they don't have to drive themselves places?
People should not subject themselves to a product run on unreliable technology, that keeps you awake, and leaves you bankrupt at the end of the day. There are other luxuries in life that come with less conditions. Try them because continuing the development of driverless cars is pointless. | 3 |
Sergey Brin, Google cofounder, believes that driverless cars can fundamentally
change the world. He also believes that the cars will be able to use a sensor to stop. Driverless cars will change the world, but will it be a good thing or a bad thing?
Driverless will indeed change the world, but just think of how much money these car cars will cost people. The things these manufacturers will have to put into the car to make it actually work will not only cost a lot for them, but it will put a huge dent in the buyers pocket. The manufacturers plan to put in sensors, computer hardware, and multiple software to help this car run. That's not the only reason why driverless cars should not be invented.
The makers of the driverless car believe that it will cause less accidents. In paragraph nine it states that if a driverless car's technology failed and the driver were to get into an accident then whose fault would it be, the drivers or the manufacturers. They both would be at fault. The manufacturer would have a be at fault the most because they should have tested the car a whole lot more to make sure that the technology wouldn't have failed. The driver would also be at fault because they should either be paying attention to the road more or learn what to do when something goes wrong.
Inventing driverless cars can also be a good thing. Driverless cars can cause less accidents because of the sensors put into them. It also requires the driver to be more alert. I understand that technology doesn't work all of the time, but if the future if the manufacturers can invent it to be safer then i think its a good idea. Another good thing about driverless cars is the car can alert the driver to take over when he/she is pulling in or out of driveways or simply dealing with traffic issues.
The manufacturers of these cars have worked on this project for about six years and they will most likely continue with this until this is known to the entire world.
In conclusion, driverless cars still have a long way to go before people will want to buy them. Some people don't like the idea of trying something new, so it will take them a lot longer to convince them that driverless cars is a good thing. | 2 |
When using technology to read students emotional expression you can expreience and read them wrong.
Using technology is a big thing in the world right now and alot of people go to technology or the internet for answers but when you use technology you can experience malunfunctions and wrong answers, so to read a student emotional expression you may read them wrong or get the wrong answer. Reading a student using technology can go many different ways you may get the right answer or you may get the wrong answer,but you can not calculate how a student feel based on a computer and facial muscles. Someone can feel angry and depressed and the computer can read them wrong. You dont have to use technology for everything you can do other things such as ask the person how they feel or look at their facial expression instead of hooking them up to technology in paragraph 5 it says "you can tell how a friend feel simply by the look on their face". The computer may say one thing but the person may feel another. This creation may work on some people but not all,in paragraph 5 it says"in fact,we humans perform this same impressive calculation everyday" even though it calculate all face expressions do not mean that person is feeling that way, a person can be mad for a few minutes or for a act then the computer will say overall that you are angry but you are really happy. In paragraph "eckman has classified six basic emotions and then associated each with characteristics movents of the facial muscles" . In conclusion, you sould not use technology to see how they feel when you can ask them and we should not have to use technology for everything when its right in front of you ,technology is taking over the way people feel towards things and people and you should not use it for someone emotional facial expressions. | 2 |
The future is full of all sorts of amazing innovations and technologies.
Life would not be the same without technology, and it seems like no one could live a day without it.
Each year the driving age requirement lowers and more accidents are occurring.
Although driverless cars are very intreeging, there are too many disadvantages that require everyone to rethink if this is what they truly want.
The main unappealing aspect of technology and engineering is that driverless cars do not have eyes, ears, or a sense of touch.
They solely rely on their sensors and other detecting qualities.
There is no way to hear if danger is coming, so how could a car react?
They may be able to detect someone or something as it approaches, but would it be too late to stop?
There are just some things that are safer if put in the hands of a living, sensing organism rather than a cold piece of hardware.
Although it may not be the very first question in mind, everyone has to wonder about the cost-benefit ratio.
If these cars really can drive themselves, how many people would be able to afford them.
Are these cars any good if only a few people are using them?
In addition, at the moment, "self driving" cars are only functioning at 25 mph.
This is not even a major road speed.
No one would spend a fortune on a car that can mostly drive itself at a staggering 25 mph.
This just is not reasonable.
There are some people who can afford these advanced machines, but there is not a high enough demand to continue developing the cars.
The very last thing any one would like to think about is a malfunction.
Technology nowadays is very advanced, but as anyone around technology would know, they do not always work.
Electronics such as the sensors always have the capability to not act as they are expected.
Distracted driving is a problem that leads to crashes, but if there were semi-self driving cars, drivers would still be distracted.
If they needed to take over and react, who is to say they will be safer?
The whole point of the driverless car is so no one needs to stay alert.
In addition to malfunctioning, the car could steal control.
If there is a situation where the driver needed to control, what if the technology thinks it is smarter and tries to override it?
There are just too many problems with putting a 2,000 pound piece of machinery, capable of killing a man in an instant, in the hands of some sensors all so the driver can relax.
There may seem to be many great qualities to having a self driving car, but there are no gauruntees in what that entails.
Cars can not sense the world in the same way as humans, and they are simply not living and reacting.
There is a major cost commitment on something potentially dangerous, and no way to help if the car takes over your driving abilities.
When in doubt, the driver knows what to do, but will he be able to do it?
There should be research in how to make our driving safer for everyone and not just an easy task to take lightly. | 3 |
I would agree with keeping the Electoral College because its a fair way to elect the president of the united states. The Electoral College consists of 538 electors the majority only 270 votes is required for the final dessision. Each candidate running for the president has his or her own group of electors but the state law varys how many are selected. The presidential election is held every four yearson the tuesday after the first monday of november.
The states are called districts for example the word state also refers to the disrict of Columbia. You can help choose your states electors when you vote forpresident. Even though your voting for your candidate your really voting for the candidates electors. Most states have a winner takes all system that awards all electors to the winning presidential candidate.
After the presidential election your govenor prepares a certificate of ascertainment listing all of your candidates who ran for president in your state. The Certificate of Ascertainment also declares the winning presidential candidate in your state at the meeting of the electors in December. Then the certificate is sent to the congress and the national records of the presidential election. | 0 |
The majority of Americans have the luxury of owning a car. A car of course, seems like a useful innovation. It gets you places quickly and efficently, and is easier than walking. Yet so many people drive cars that the roads get congested and clogged easily as the cars just idle in the road waiting for the traffic jam to loosen up. Car usage causes the enviroment to decline and an increase in air poulltion, it would be a great idea to lower car usage since it is so detrimental to the health of the enviroment and the health of the populace.
An advantage to reducing car usage is a more benifical enviroment and a better overall health standard. "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some ... areas in the United States." (Source 1). Personal cars directly contribute to greenhouse gas enissions and by cutting down personal car usage and encouraging the use of car pooling and public transportation we can decrease greenhouse gas emmmisions. Also walking and biking to your destination instead of driving helps encourage healthy living and habits as well as exercise.
Cars also cause poulltion and smog to hang over cities causing the air to be full of harmful chemicals, endagering peoples health and also causing a rise in asthma for the populace that lives inside the city. In places like Beijing,China smog and poulltion from cars cause the air to be so foggy and dirty that you cannot even see the sky. "Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city."(Source 2). When Paris was accosted by the same problem they solved it by a temporary ban on driving to clear the air. Without so many people driving cars we wouldn't have these many issues with smog and it's effect on the enviroment. With less car usage smog and pollution would drop.
Driving not only creates an issue with air pollution but also with water pollution and the contamination of the earth. Cars run on gasoline, a fossil fuel. Which is brought up from underground by drilling into the earth. Fracking often has a negative effect on the earth, often causing oil spills into the ocean or earth. The effect of the oil spill is pollution and mass death of wildlife in that area. By using alternative methods of transportation such as trains,buses,taxis,subways, walking and biking we reduce the amount of gas used and also the amount of car emmissons released into the air. Cars guzzle gasoline and this causes a huge need for fossil fuel, by using cars less we lessen the need for gasoline.
Many people agree with the statment that without cars their lives are easier and less stressful due to the fact that they no longer have to worry about traffic jams and car crashes as well as any other dangerous event that can happen while driving. This excerpt from the third source, shows a man's reply to the event Day Without Cars that takes place in Bogota,Colombia once a year. "'It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution,' said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza."(Source 3). This excerpt only furthers my point that less car usage causes people to be more calm and less worried or stressed. "'When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way,' said Heidrun Walter" (Source 1). This quote from source 1 which discusses a suburb in Germany that is car-free. This blurb shows another example of someone who became happier without a car. Another advantage to reducing car usage is less stress.
Also to some people a car is just a backup for when public transportation falls through. "They organize their summer jobs and social life around where they can walk or take public transporation or car-pool with friends." (Source 4) By reducing uneeded car usage we cause a more effiecent society less dependent on cars and more dependent on better types of alternative transportation. "'A car is just a means of getting from A to B when BART [type of public transport] doesn't work.'" (Source 4). By improving public transport we reduce car usage which improves the enviroment and quality of life.
Less car usage will help the enviroment as well as lower stress. "Transportation is the second largest source of America's emmisons." (Source 4). By eliminating uneeded car usage and introducing more public transportation and alternate means of transport we will be eliminating one of the greatest causes of greenhouse gas emissions in America. The advantages of eliminating car usage is less pollution, healthier living and a less stressful life. | 4 |
The Challenge of Exploring Venus
Every planet is different and unique in their own way. Every planet is known for what they are and I'm going to talk about Venus.
Venus is our second planet in our solar system, many people agree and disagree that studying Venus is and is not pursuit despite the dangers it presents of the author saying and I agree with the author because it could be dangerous enough if someone would go up in space and not be prepared. Reasons why I think it wouldn't be a good idea because in the text in paragraph six it says that "Many researchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus". In my own words I believe it is not safe because what if it doesn't last long ?
I believe that Venus is a good planet but it's not safe studying in Venus. I understand that people may disagree but everyone safety is important first when they go up in space. | 1 |
Driverless cars are not going to better transportation. I believe it could help with the dangers of the road but even then all technology could malfunction. The idea behind driverless cars are showing advancement in technology but are we really ready to put our lives in the hand of a computer? I don't believe so.
Driverless cars would be used as public transportation, (Paragraph One) which could cause tardiness if one does not arrive in time. The cars themselves would cost a lot more to build and massive upgrades to existing roads, something that is just simply to expensive to be practical, (Paragraph Three). We have the technology to make the cars a great success but all of the negative factors outway the good factors at this point. The expensne, the liability of the cars technology malfunctioning, The laws that would need to be altered, and the cars themselves being legalized as they are still illegal in most states, (Paragraph Nine). Who would be at fault if the technology fails? The driver or the Manufacturer? All those questions must be answered before driverlesss cars are legal, and with that alone it's gonna be an expensive quest to legalize and produce the driverless cars.
If the driverless cars become a success and Tesla's 2016 release for a car cable of driving on autopilot 90 percent of the time, (Paragraph Ten), and used efficently then the cars would be a huge advancement and break through. Only problem is that it's a big risk. When technology is first made there are always glitches and malfunctions, so how can the manufactuer gurantee safety with that taken into consideration. Although people already abuse driving privelages, imagine someone controlling the driverless car while drunk driving.
Driverless cars are a big risk. Malfunctions do occur, they occur in technology everyday. The projects themselves cost a lot of money, trusting someones's life which is priceless is a big leap of trust and faith into technology and manufactuers. Driverless cars are a big risk and overall waste of time and money. | 3 |
This is why you should be a Seagoing Cowboy. You should be a Seagoing Cowboy because they get to see the ocean alot. They get a really good veiw. You also get to help people by making more cows to eat. You can help them alot to by skining them and making fur for covers. You can also give them mules and horses to ride so they do not have to walk.
You can also travel to alot of countrys,and states. They have alot of animals so if your a animal person you would love the job. It is kinda like a real farm but not on land you feed animals twice or three times a day. You put hay out for them and things like that.
You can have fun to it is not just all work you can play table tenis. You also play volly ball and kick ball to. You play boxing and fencing to. You read and whittl to pass time. It helps to know that you are helping someone in need in a other country. Being a Seagoing Cowboy is a adventure and thats why you should be a Seagoing Cowboy. | 2 |
The positive things in the article are like can you imagine no one buying cars no more because we won't even need them anymore because a future with a public transport system where fleets on driverless cars form a public transport taxi system the cars would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility then a bus and most driving laws focus on keeping drivers passengers and pedestrians safe and lawmarkers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers the information from the sensors can cause the cars to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine allowing far better response control then a human driver could manage along.
The negative things in the artcle are like why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver like wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive that dont even makes sinces and so really the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires
Antilock brakes and driver assistance still seem a long way from the dream of calling a driverless cab to take us wherever we wont but sebastian thrun founder of the google car project believes that the technology has finally begun to catch up to the dream | 0 |
Are driverless cars a good idea? I think driverless cars is a good idea because it's safer, smarter, and efficient. Are driverless cars a good idea?
My first reason on why driverless cars is a good idea is because it's safer. For example Google's cars that have been driving around everywhere is has driven more than a half a million miles without a crash, and why wouldn't it be better choice since it hasnt gotten into a crash yet. Are driverless cars a good idea?
My second reason on why driverless cars is a good idea is because it's smarter. The way the driverless cars are smart is because they use sensors to warn the driver when to manuver and they have cameras all around the car to detect other vehicles, and there is this one bit of technology that is in the car that makes it a smarter choice and that is the Dubbed Lidar, it uses laser beams to detect what's around the car. Are driverless cars a good idea?
My third reason on why driverless cars is a good idea is because it's more efficient. The way it's more effiecient is because it tells the driver when they are needed to control the wheel because of accidents and other hazards can make the car crash so the person driving needs to handle the wheel most of the time. Another detail about it being more efficient is that all the driver really needs to do is watch the road while the car does driving. Are driverless cars a good idea?
In conclusion I think that driverless cars is a good idea because it's safer, smarter, and more efficient. Are driverless cars a good idea? | 2 |
In 1976 NASA's Viking 1 took a photo of a landform that resembled a face. This excited the public. NASA has gone back to that place twice and taken higer defenition photos to make sure that it is not a face or some monument made by aliens. They have fond that it is a common landform, a mesa or butte. If it were more, NASA would tell the public right away. News of life on Mars would excite the public, and provide NASA with funding for future explorations.
The first photo of the landform was taken in 1976 by Viking 1. Each pixel in the photo represents 43 meaters. It is difficult to see deitalies in this photo. NASA believed that it was thier duty to make sure this was not a sign of extraterestrial life. In 1998, Mars Orbiter Camera took a picture ten times sharper than the original. This picture showed more deatail, but the public was not satisfied. In 2001 NASA took another photo of the spot. In this photo a pixel is equal to 1.56 meters. This image is so sharp that if anything unusual were there, you could see it.
Mesas are a common landform in that area. Cydonia, where the Face is located has lots of other landforms like mesas and buttes. Simaler landforms are also found on earth. Landforms come in all different shapes and sizes, and this one happens to resemble a face. That is not unusual, we like to find thing that look like other things. For example you might see a cloud and say it looks like a bunny. Likewise we see a landform and say it resembles a face.
The Face, "a huge rock formation...resembles a human head", but this is pure coincedence. the shape of the formation forms shadows giving the illusion of eyes, a nose, and a mouth. NASA has taken very detailed photographs to make sure there is not alien life. The Face on Mars is a mesa or butte, a common formation. If there was life on Mars NASA wouldn't hide it, it would excite people about space and provide money for future explorations. | 3 |
The electoral college is one of the most heavily criticized institutions in the American government system. It has been considered outdated and anti-democratic. However, without it, the balance of power in America would be skewed to an unacceptable degree. States with large populations would be disproportionately empowered, without the electoral college. This leaves the smaller states' existence to be controlled by the larger states, to the dismay of the American economy and people.
As it stands, most states vote in a way that presents a united front of electors to the electoral college. If just over half of the Californian voters vote for one candidate that they think would represent their interests, the map in source 3 shows that all 55 electors will present their votes to the college. It is better for California to be represented in this way so that the Californian economy would not be adversely effected by their minority voters. That sort of united front is beneficial to every state in the union, for the same reason.
The argument that the electoral college discourages voters of the minority party to vote is a valid criticism, but it is a problem that can be solved without the loss of the electoral college. Compulsory voting would be far more effective if voter turnout is an issue. People who would not have voted otherwise would still likely vote for the candidate they supported if voting was made mandatory.
In source 2, Bradford Plumer expressed dissatisfaction with the way political campaigns involving the electoral college focus on swing states rather than allowing equal debate in all states, but that does not make for a less desirable outcome. Dissolving the electoral college would make swing states irrelevant to presidential elections, as it'd be impossible to win votes in those states by any decent margin. Instead, campaigns would focus on the areas in which they already have an agreeable population, as to encourage them to vote, and get the most voters possible, using their resources. Trying to win states, rather than population, allows for voters to be more informed.
The electoral college might not be the best potential method for presidential elections. It is, however, far more desirable for such a large country than popular vote. Popular vote would lead to neglecting many areas of the economy that are important, but do not have a presence in states with large populations. It would make elections more one sided for each state at the same time. The problems the opponents say abolishing it would fix, would be fixed without it, but doing so would create far more problems than it solved. It is also easy enough to fix the same problems without abolishing the electoral college. | 4 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.