full_text stringlengths 737 20.5k | score int64 0 5 |
|---|---|
Driverless Cars
Driverless cars could change the world for the better. They could make our lives easier and less stressful. Driverless cars could save lives, save time, and save money. These cars would be a great replacement for the manual cars used today. Driverless cars could benefit our society greatly.
This new invention of cars without drivers could save many lives. Each year thousands of citizens die, or are injured due to car accidents. These accidents are caused mainly by drivers. If cars continue to need drivers, many more deaths will result from this horrible choice. The drivers of these vehicles could be drunk, driving illegally without a valid license, texting, or distracted, resulting in car crashes. The possibilities as to why a person driving a car could get into an accident are endless! However, with no unsuitable driver at the wheel, roads all over the world will become much safer. If ,instead of a driver, the car is automated and drives by itself, people could rid the world of unsafe drivers. With these driverless cars, thousands of lives all over the world could be spared.
Driverless cars could save people time. According to paragraph two in the article, Google's driverless cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash. Less crashes would result in less traffic jams. Without traffic jams, citizens would be able to get to their destination quicker and easier. Driverless cars could also save time by not having to constantly run into blocked roads. Due to the driverless cars being automated and controlled by an automated system, the system will most likely be able to detect the quickest route to the preferred destination. Therefore, driverless cars could be an advantage to us by saving us time.
With the invention of the driverless car, homo sapiens (humans) would be able to save money. The first product of the driverless car is not bound to be cheap, but as time progresses, the cost of this new car will eventually go down. According to paragraph one in the provided article, the driverless cars would use half the fuel of today's cars and would offer far more flexibility than a bus. Gas is a very expensive fuel. However, if citizens were to only need to pay for half of the money they pay for gas today, then they could save a lot of money that could be used for more important investments. Also, the driverless cars could result in less car crashes, which would result in not having to pay for damage repair. Overall, the driverless cars would not only your save life, but your money too.
The driverless cars could benefit our lives. They would be able to not only improve the way people live today, but they would also have the power to save lives, save time, and save money. This new car design could be the exact replacement, for the manual car used today, our society has been looking for. With these cars, students would also be able to focus on their schoolwork more, rather than on passing their driving exam. They could change life as people know it. The driverless cars would fundamentally change the world for the better. | 4 |
By reading "Driverless Cars Are Coming" I think to myself that they still need improvment. Now cars been around for a long time, but not that long for us to make a car that drives its self. People who drive right now are better off driving themself, I understand they think its cool and it will change the future, but there will be far more accidents then when people regularly drive. They even said that they need improvements such as not being able to go around accidents or off road, and even destruction workers. Now even though it drives its self which is cool you know but how would the car know if there is a stop sign or a red light, there will be an accident.
Now if cars cant see where a stop sign is and if its a red light or yellow light then there is no reason to make a driverless car. Thats like having a blind person walk across the street while they think its their living room. If the human driver has to be alerted if the car does something it was not suppose to do then they should wait 5 to 7 more years until they release it out to the public. Im no science guy or car dude but I know that it would take longer for a car to drive its self. Stick with normal cars.
The year 2020 is not far away in fact theres 4 more years until 2020 is upon us, thats not enough years to find out what is wrong with the car, fix it and find more problems and fix another one. Every car has problems with it but if your more focused on the car driving its self and accidently forget about the other things like the stock and perhaps a screw for the tire then well your screwed. Alot of people mess up on scooters and forget a part or two but thats nothing because they are easy to drive, but forgetting a part for a car, one that drives its self is dangerous for society. I get it we all make mistakes but that is not what people are going to think when one computer car crashes into a tree because it though it was a road. Then boom people say take away driverless cars.
While im on this computer typing i worry about the computer crashing. While i worry about that what do you think people will worry about when they are the road? They will be worried about dying or getting injured from a computer crashing. That gets me to my next topic, say your on a bike riding home and you hear a car right behind you, but you dont know it was a driverless car then the computer crashes and you get injured and you sue the person for not being careful but you should be suing google for not taking more time and making things better. Then google loses everything because they lost the coart battle.
There are planes that the government has been working on for a very long time, and there are still problems with it. I understand nothing is perfect but dont take the chance to make a car to drive its self and when it messes up people blame the company because people look at it like that. They aint use to it. They are use to regular cars that people can drive in. People see crashes all the time because its usually one of the drivers that dont know what they are doing. When they see that it was a driverless car the car is going to get blamed and the people who didnt take their time in their project. | 3 |
Their are still tons of people that think the mesa on the planet Mars is a face created by aliens. They think this because when NASA took the pictures of it everyone that saw it thought it was a face. Nobody thought it was just a natural landform. When it was just a natural landform called a mesa.
The reason that it is impossible for that mesa on Mars to actually be a face created by aliens is because the new cameras with a high-resolution picture looks nothing like a face just a landform. The first picture was took way back inn 1976. They didn't have cameras with th picture quality that we have now so the mesa really looks like it could be a face. But then in 1998 they took some more pictures of the face and it still kinda looked like a face but more like a landform. Then they took more pictures in 2001 with a camera that had high-resolution quality and then scientist proved that is was just a normal landform.
But their still was people that thought it was still a face the some aliens created even though scientist at NASA proved it was a mesa. But for some reason tons of people thought that NASA had something to hide. The mesa that people call the face on Mars has been in movies and newspapers because a lot of conspiracy theorists think that NASA is trying to keep the face a secret because they think nobody should know about even though the pictures prove that is just a normal landform. | 2 |
The face that NASA found on mars was not made by aliens. The Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia and got better pictures than the Viking did and it showed that there was no alien monument, it was just a natural landfrom. The picture shows the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa, which are landforms common around the American West. Lastly the picture that the Viking took was not very good quality compared to the pictures took in 2001.
One reason that the Face on Mars was not made by aliens is because the Mars Global Surveyor got the best picture of it in 2001 and it just turned out to be a natural landform. In line 11 it says that "As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size," he also added. "So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!"
Another reason that the Face was not made by aliens is that the face is the equivalent of as butte or a mesa, which are landforms common around the American West. In paragraph 12 it compares the Face on Mars to the Snake River Plain of Idaho. The Snake River Plain of Idaho is a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa that is about the same height as the Face on Mars.
The pictures that the
Mars Global Surveyor took in 2001 were a lot more clearer than the pictures took by the Viking in 1976. In paragraph 10 it says that Malin's team captured an amazing picture using the camera's absolute maximum resolution. Each pixal in the 2001 photo spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixal in the best 1976 Viking photo. This proves how bad the quality was in the 1976 photo taken by the Viking. Also, it proves that it was not a good photo and that the 2001 photo shows so much more and is way better quality. Other people might say that in the photo of '98, taken by the cmaera on board the MGS had to pear through wispy clouds to see the face, which made the alien markings hidden by the haze. Then the picture or 2001 proved that there was no alien markings and that the Face was just a landform.
In conclusion, this is why I believe that the Face of Mars was not made by aliens and is just a natural landform. First of all, The Mars Global Surveyor got better quality pictures than the Vikning did. Also, the 2001 picture shows that the Face is the equivalent to a mesa or butte, which are landforms that are common in the American West. Lastly, when you compare the '76, '98, and the '01 picture side by side you can tell that the '98 and the '01 pictures are more clear and show that the Face is just a landform. | 4 |
Dear senator:
My name is PROPER_NAME im from a lil town called LOCATION_NAME.And I saw where you was trying to see if yall should keep the Electoral College or change to election by popular vote for the president of the United States. Well I think you should change it to election by popular vote for the president of the United States.
So I think you should change to election by popular vote for the president of the United States.Because if you elect a president by slate of electors, who in turn elect the president. Thats not fare to the other person that was running, because what if the other person was winning and they lose because the slate of electors elect the person that was losing. For example Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president.
So Mr. Senator can you take what i told you and try and change Electoral College or change to election by popular vot e for the president of the United States. Because it's not fare to the other runner up.
Sinserly PROPER_NAME | 1 |
A reason people should join the program is help countries recover supply of food, animals, and more. The text states," It was 1945, World War ll was over in Europe, and many countries were left in ruins." The text also states," To help these countries recover their food supplies, animals, and more, 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA (the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration)."
They should join together for the program to also help with families that have had relatives die in World War ll. The text states," Luke Bomberger crossed the Atlantic Ocena 16 times and the Pacfic Ocean twice to help people affected by World War ll." The text also states," Helping out aunt Katie's farm as a boy had prepared Luke for hard work, but not for the dangers at sea. On his second, Luke served as a night watchman. His job was to check on all the animals every hour."
Luke started helping them because he wanted to help people after World War ll. The text states," Lurk Bomberger had no idea that his life would change soon after his highschool graduation. He was working two part-time jobs in a grocery store and a bank when his friend Don Reist invited him to go to Europe on a cattle boat. Luke couldn't say no. He knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime." The text also states," UNRRA hired "Seagoing Cowboys" to take care of the horses, young cows, and muled that were shipped overseas. Luke and Don signed up."
Luke helped shop 335 horses with hay and oats to Greece. The text states," In August 1945, they recieved their ordes to report to New Orleans. 'We arrived August 14,' Luke says, 'the day the Pacific war ended." The text also states," They got their seaman's papers and boarded the SS Charles W. Wooster, headed for Greece--with a cargo of 335 horses plus enough hay and oats to feed them."
Another reason to help is because sometimes, you can see places you've never experienced before. The text states," The cattle-boat trips were an unbelievable opportunity for a small-town boy,' he says. 'Besides helping people, i had the side benefit of seeing Europe and China. But seeing the Acropolis in Greece was special,' he says." The text also states," ' So was taking gondola ride in Venice, Italy, a city with streets of water.' Luke also toured an exavated castle in Crete and marveled at the Panamam Canal on his way to China."
After that, he unloaded the animals and then had a little fun. The text states," Luke also found time to have fun on board, especially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded. The cowboys played baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed. Table-tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and games also helped pass the time." The text also states," But being a Seagoing Cowboy was much more that an adventure for Luke Bomberger. It opened up the world to him. 'I'm grateful for the opportunity,' he says. 'It made me more aware of people of other countries and their needs,' And that awareness stayed with him, leadin his family to host a number of international students and exchange visitors for many years." | 2 |
In "The Challenges of Exploring Venus" the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents.
The author doesn't use wording that makes him sound stuborn or demanding.
The article also brings up the idea of studying Venus gradually, instead of pushing the idea right away.
Also, the author is very honest about the conditions of Venus.
All of this taken into consideration, the author's view on the matter is compelling and well supported.
The author's suggestion is well supported throughout the article.
As the author brings up the idea of studying Venus they address the problems and give solutions for them, instead of brushing over them.
This is shown when the author talks about a technology that NASA is working on that could help. He wrote," By comparison, systems that use mechanical parts can be made more resistant to pressure, heat , and other forces."
The author also gives benefits that a human would be helpful for humans if they were to go and study Venus. The author states," Solar power would be plentiful, and radation would not exceed Earth levels."
The author also realizes that the conditions on Venus would not be comfortable and makes this known when he wrote," Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans."
In conclusion the author supports their idea of studying Venus exceedingly well.
The author not only makes know the problems that everone worries about but also offers solutions for them.
They also gradually make their view know instead of pushing it right away. The article is very compelling with the amount of information given and honesty that the author has when talking on the subject.
Since, the author addresses the dangers of studying Venus and tries to solve them or atleast work around them the article is overall informative and well supported. | 3 |
Many people believe that it is necessary to use a car to get from one place to another. Many studies have shown that this in fact is not true. There are many advantages to limiting car usage. I am in favor of limiting car usage because of the advantages it brings to the world. One reason to limit car usage is, because it reduces the amount of pollution. Another reason, is because many people around the world are in favor of limiting car usage. Lastly, limiting car usage lowers emissions and improves safety. Beneficial and critical, limiting car usage helps humans as well as the environment.
First of all, limiting car usage reduces the amount of pollution worldwide. Reflective and didactic, Robert Fuller's "Paris bans driving due to smog," reflects the amount of pollution that is reduced due to limited car usage. For example, Robert Fuller explains that "...[Last] week Paris had 147 micrograms of particulate matter (PM) per cubic meter compared with 114 in Brussels and 79.7 in London, Reuters found." This statement layers Robert's opinion that car usage can create vast amounts of pollution. If car usage is limited, the amount of particulate matter would decrease. For instance, this theory is created when Robert Fuller states "The smog cleared enough Monday for the ruling French party to rescind the ban for odd-numbered plates on Tuesday."
Another reason, is because many people around the world are in favor. Appauled and enthusiastic, Andrew Selsky's "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota", molds the theory that limiting car usage has many advantages. For instance, businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza states "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," as he rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife. The fact that many people around the world are in favor of limiting car usage is shown, when Andrew Selsky sates that "Municipal authorities from other countries came to Bogota to see the event and were enthusiastic." Bogota Mayor Antanas Mockus is also in favor as he states "The rain hasn't stopped people from participating." These statements show that limiting car usage is very beneficial and has many advantages.
Lastly, limiting car usage lowers emissions and improves safety. This is shown in Elisabeth Rosenthal's "The End of Car Culture." Elisabeth states that "...it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment." Elisabeth Rosenthal also states that "...transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions just behind power plants." Limiting car usage also improves safety. Last year in Barcelona, Spain, Bill Ford, executive chairman of the Ford Motor Company, proposed partnering with telecommunications. Bill Ford wanted to partner with the telecommunications industry to create cities in which "pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transpotation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety." This statement forms the theory that limiting car usage has many advantages.
In conclusion, limiting car usage has many advantages. We as people of the world need to limit car usage for many reasons. The first reason is, because it reduces the amount of pollution. The second reason is that many people around the world are in favor of limiting car usage. The last reason is, because limiting car usage lowers emissions and improves safety. This is why we as citizens of the world need to limit car usage worldwide. | 3 |
We have a Universe full of uncertainties and dangers. Since that is the case, should we just give up trying to discover new things? No, of course not, Then why should Venus be any different. It might be a risky and dangerous job but, this might also be a golden opportunity to, maybe find out connections between Venus and our Earth.
Astonomers believe that Venus used to be an Earth-like planet long ago. There are actual some features now on Venus that resmbles to Earth wiith familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and even craters. Furthermore, let us not forget the fact that Venus also sometimes is our nearest option for a plantery visit. That should be more than enough reason to try and study more of Venus. One day we might need that information, so better safe then sorry.
Lastly, even though is will be difficult scientist are already figuring out safer options to study Venus, like hovering over the planet to gather intel without a real big risk. And even getting electronics tested for Venus's harsh climate. It might be difficult but, where would we be if we just gave up trying to discover new things when things get tough. | 2 |
In 1976, a NASA Mars Globe surveyor called Viking 1 took a picture of an area on Mars that looked like a face. Although some believe the Face was created by aliens, I believe it is a natural landform because the pictures provide visual evidence, it would prove there is life on other planets, and it would bring in money for NASA.
NASA has taken 3 pictures. The first one taken in 1976 looked most like a face, but NASA said that it was the planet's "unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh." A second picture was taken on April 5, 1998 that was ten times sharper than the original picture taken by Viking 1. Web surfers were dissapointed to see a natural landform. The unsatisfied viewers claimed that the whispy clouds hid the alien markings on the Face. April 8, 2001, on a cloudless summer day, they took a picture with each pixel spanning 1.56 meters compared to the previous 43 meters per pixel. The new picture revealed exactly what NASA claimed the Face to be, a mesa.
The discovery of life outside of Earth would be exciting. It would provide a chance to exchange scientific knowlege and possibly food or animals. It could also reveal new technologies that could put the world years further than it would be without this help. This excange could change both planets for the better and improve the lives of all species. NASA wouldn't pass up this chance to better the planet.
Some conspiracy theorists may claim, "The Face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars- evidence that NASA wold rather hide." This is untrue because the defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization because it would bring in more money. This could be spent on new technology that could lead to new discoverys in space.
This proves that the Face on Mars was not caused by aliens. It is a natural landform that is claimed to look like the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho, which is about the same height as the Face on Mars. If an alien civilazation were discovered, though, we would not pass up the opportunity to change both our world and the aliens' world for the better. | 3 |
Its is helping the people and the animals from cities in world war 2 . The UNRRA (united nations relief and rehabilitation administration).hired "Seagiong cowboys". they would go to places all around the world to take care of animals shipped over seas.
In august 1945 they, luke and don, recieved orders to go to New Oleans. they arrived on august 14th. The day the pacific war ended. They got thier papers and borded the SS Charles W.Wooster, headed for greece with a cargo of 335horses plus all of thier food.
They could also see alot of places like Eruope and China. They also saw the acropolis in Greece but caring for the animals kept luke busy for a while. They had to be feed and water 2 to 3 times a day. The stalls had to be cleaned to so they needed help.
The program was a great way to help the people and the animals. We probably wouldnt have as many animals if the seagiong cowboys didnt help. Thats why they need you to join. Its very benificial and you can see places you have never seen before its also a great way to make friends since youre stuck on a ship for days you can get to now them just like luke and don.
In paragraph 5,6,7,8 you can see why luke joined. He tryed something new and liked it . He had a fun time seeing all the places and helping the animals .
Helping on the fram, did probably helped too.
God new what was going to happen in luke life and God was there every step of the wayeven though luke could of died that day he slipped and fell god saved him and he only had some cracked ribs. | 2 |
The driverless car is a great concept but I don't believe that our technology is prepared for it yet. There are too many things that could go wrong and that's if the government even lets these cars out on the road. It would be a really great idea, especially on longer trips like our family trip down to Florida every year for spring break. In reality I just can't see it being that safe and successful.
The writer talks a little bit about having special roads for these cars and this is just a concept of mere fiction. There is no way we can embed every single one of America's roads with an electrical cable, it's just not a possible thing to do. With America already in so much debt, I can't see how making these roads a reality would actually help the United States in any way.
Now we are going to scratch the smart road thing because we all know that it's ridiculous, and move on to a semi-possible option-smartcars. My first topic here is that machines always malfunction eventually. No matter how well the manufacturer makes them, they will always malfunction in some way or another. I'm sure these cars will cost a fortune, and with that cost no one will want to update them every three years. Not wanting to update these cars puts everyone at risk for malfunctions. Personally I know I'm bad about taking the time to update my phone, so I'd be really bad about updating my car. Whether that be the cars data recognition is worn out or the technology simply isn't up to date, malfunctions will happen.
When these malfunctions do happen, who is to blame? The car for not working properly or the person for not updating their car? Technically, it is the cars fault for not stopping and rearending another car, but a car can't pay for the damages. I could see a lot of law suits coming out from this, may it be between individuals in an accident or a customer verses a manufacturer. I think manufacturers should really do themselves a favor and say out of this technology advance. Accidents are already not fun we don't need to add another complicated measure to the process.
When I first read about the driverless car I thought it was a great idea, and not until I dug a little deeper into the concept did I realize that there are some things about a driverless car that our society isn't ready for. We don't have the money to help this idea be successful, nor do we have the mindsets of Americans to make it successful. I believe within my lifetime that it could be good to have driverless cars, but for now I can only look at it as a great idea with bad reprecussions. | 3 |
The author supports this idea that venus is the closest planet to the earth, and that they want to know more about the planet venus.I think that they tried to send spacecraft to know what's on venus,and know what's going on in the planet. In the text it says that "NASA is working on other apporaches to study Venus in some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus surface."Another reason in the text is to why it's worth studying is "Many researchers are wroking on innovation that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knownledge of Venus." I do think that it is worth pursiting despite of danger because we can learn alot and also see what's going on in other planets so that
way we know what we can do to change and protect the
planet earth, and not cause much more damage than what we already casued in our solar system.With using robot and other tecololgy is better to know what's going on in Venus. | 1 |
The author supports his idea of Venus being a worthy pursuit despiting the dangers by explaining how its the closest planet to us. Venus used to have oceans just like earth. Tare some details the author give us in the passage about enus being an worthy but dangerous planet to explore.
In paragragraph 2 he explains how its the closest planet to earth in terms to density and size. Its also closest in distance to us at certain times. Its dangerous because they sent several space craft and it only lasted a few Hours after it landed. Thats probably the reason why not a single spaceship has landed in more than three decades ago.
It would be hard to land there and stay ther because of the heat and the carbon dioxide. the atmosphere is almost 97 pecent carbon dioxide which would make it impossible to breathe in. The average temperature is over eight hundred degrees fahrenheit. the pressure is also ninety times greater than what we experience.
The scientitist wouldnt be able to take rock or gases off the planet so they would have to get close and take huge risk. NASA s working on studies for venus like they simplifie electronice and made silicone carbide that has been tested in chamber simulatin wich could last up to threee weeks. He thinks its because of human curiosity and will likelyy lead to many equally intimidating endeavors.
These are some of the examples of the author using details in the text showing why he beleives ecploring Venus is worthey other than all the danger. | 1 |
The author supports the study of Venus ia a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. One detail from the artical is that the atmosphere has a 97 perecnt carbon dioxide on Venus. A second detail from the passage is the planet surfaces, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmosperic perssure is 90 greater than earths.
A third detail from the passage is striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value. A fourth detail from the passage is a the insight is to be gained on the planet itself but also human curiosity.
A fith detail from the passage is that expanding to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation.
A sixth detail passage is researchers cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from a distance. A seventh detail from the passage is At thirty-plus miles above the surface temperatures would be hot at 170 gegrees Fahrenheit. Another detail from the passage is Earth, such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our ocean and would liquefy many metals.
A nineth detail from the passage is solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels; Not easy conditions! but survivable for humans.
A tenth detail from the passage is a ship orbiting or hovering safely above the planet can be safer. A elventh detail from the passage is Many researchers are working on innovations that allow machines to last longer. A tewelth detail from the passage is old computers will help researchers last machines longer. A thirdteenth detail from th passage is systems can use mechanical parts be more resistant to heat pressure, heat, and other forces. A fourthteenth detail from this passage is NASA is working on approaches to beat the harmful condition of Venus.
A fithtenth deatil from this passage is previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. A sixthtenth detail from this passage is issue explain why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades. A seventhtenth detail from this passage is numerous factors contribute to Venus’s reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study.
Last detail from this passage is erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and lightning strikes.
All these details show what the author supports the study of Venus ia a worthy pursuit despite the danger. | 2 |
The challenge of Exploring Venus
As the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents, I agree with him. In the article "The challenge of Exploring Venus" explains many things from talking about Venus all the way to what it exactly is. I agree with the author because Venus is reffered to Earth's "twin" and that's one exmaple for why it's important for us to know and learn. Another example in the article, talks about how it's worth the danger it presents. In the article it says "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus" this is explaing what it causes and how it's worth for us to know about, despite the danger it presents.
In paragraph 2 of this article, it's explaining to us readers that Venus is often reffered to as Earth's "twin." We need to know whats by our planet and if its harmful to be near or not. Venus is the closet plant to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closet in distance as well. As well as Venus being close to Earth, there's also mars which these two are our planetary neighbors, whom orbit the the sun at different speeds. Since we have Venus being around the corner at times, humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-drapped world not knowing anything about this planet. We have sent numerous people to explore this planet not knowing the dangers it presents, all though its worth knowing.
With being said, a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Think of all that carbon dioxide we're inhailing just to be on that planet. We're going through all that because Venus is a worthy pursuit. Not only that but the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. That right there is why more than what we, humans, are used to.
Now you're probably thinking since our twin planet is so inhospitable, then why are sicentist even discussing futher vists to its surface? The reason behind is because astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our Solar system. Even of the dangers it can pursit. Long ago, Venus was more than likely covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like our Earth. Even today venus still has some features. The value of returing to Venus seems indisputable, but think about this, what are the options for making such a mission both safe and scientifically productive?
Overall studying Venus is such a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it can occur to us. As I have shown some examples how its worthy but yet a worth pursuit, I think its an important planet to know about. It's important because it referred to our "twin" planet, it's has so much carbon dixoide and a high fahrenheit, and lastly it still has features today that can be providing for different forms of life that we don't know about. Venus is an important planet to all and it needs to be known. | 3 |
The author gives many reasons why we should study venus despite the dangers it present. He give also a lot of information for why the planet does not have a good environment. He also list so of th dangers that are there for people and how it could effect them if they traveled to this planet. Like how 97% of the planets atomsphere in carbon dioxide and sulfuric acid.
One reason that the author gives NASA has a possible solution to the hostile conditions. The author says " Imagine a blimp-like vehical hovering 30 or some miles above the roiling Venusian landscape". Like the Jet airplanes today it would travel at high altitude to fly over the dangerous air conditions. But every 30 mile above the temperatureis still a toasty 170 degrees Fahrenheit.
Another reason that the author gives is NASA is working on other way to study Venus. The author says "Some simlified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions". Would the machine give workers the time they needed to study the thing the need.
The last reason that the author gives looking back on old technology called mechanical computers. The authors says " these devices were first envisioned in the 1800s and played an important role in the 1940s during World War 2". The thought was computers existing in those days may sound shocking, But these devices make calculations by using gears abd levels. Modern computers are powerful quick and flexible but are delicate.
The idea of traveling to Venus is a very real thing that could be achevied. Though had work and smart thinking what the author has share give us ideas of what the planet is like and the surface and in the air. The the space ship and vehical and devices that will take us there and help us learn. | 2 |
When limiting the car uses to many of people it helps the world because of all the polution that the cars are letting out. The problem with that is its killing animals, trees and plants, and its messing with the global air.
Almost 4,000 drivers were fine because people their cars impounded for their reaction to the fine. When having a car it can make you tense. When not driving it saving the trees and air and you dont have loud car noises and dont have to worry about children and aduilts dieing by getting hit with a car.
When having a car you have to pay for gas which is alot money and can add up when or if you drive alot. Gas was alot of money and with out gas you cant drive no where so you have to use make money just to be able to go places. Cars that take deisel gas are ruining the worl because it releases alot of polution that killing many of anilmals and trees and people are not going to not use their car if it deisel because they need to get to places. The cars are creating alot of smog. | 1 |
Has anyone ever thought about driverless cars and have you thought about the good and the bad about them? Well i sure have found out a lot about them and I know that people have different mind set about these care because of how they are set up and I can tell you i agree with how they are set up and i like it and here is why.
In the article about "Driverless cars Are Coming" I agree about have them
because in paragraph seven the text states that these driveless cars are made to have the seats vibrate when you car is in danger when back up on another object. I also agree because in the text it says that the law is focus on keeping driver, passangers safe. They have made a whole bunch of sensors to put on cars to make them safe.
Driverless cars are a exellent idea I think because in the text it clearly states everything about the car and it tells about it and I agree with the idea because of what the law requires and howthey have mad it safe for people and there objects for there cars I also thought it was a good idea because of the way the they put the sensors in the car. | 1 |
Technology is evolving at an exceptional rate. We are now creating a driverless car. I think that driverless cars would be great. The car will not be fully driverless but for the most part it will. It needs your hands on the wheel at all times just incase the car cant handle the situation. The car has sensors all around it. It has it on the top of the car, the sides, and the back. This car will create driving to be safer.
The car has sensors all around the car. It has a position-estimating sensor on the left rear wheel, a roating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor. All these sensor mimic the skill of a human but better. These sensors have a far better response and control that a human driver could manage alone. Making driving safer and allowing the car to handle more and more driving taks on their own. For example the antilock brake system. The sensors in the brakes detects and responds to the danger of out-of-control skids or rollovers. The information from the sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine, allowing far better respones and control than a human.
Another reason why driverless cars are great it because it still keeps your attention on the road. What I mean is that even though its driving on their own it still makes sure you have your eyes on the road. The car lets your know if the driver has to take over. For example, if the cars happens to run into a road block or work zones it vibrates the seat to get the drivers attention or it announces when the driver should be prepared to take over. So instead of dozing off and not paying attention the car has a special touch feature that makes sure you have your hands on the wheel at all time.
So driverless cars are the next big thing. It brings safety and responses faster that a human driver can handle. It has many sensors to detect problems on the road and it has special features that makes sure your eyes is on the road. These options all the car to handle more things and more driving tasks on its own. | 2 |
Dear State Senator,
Im just a regular voter arguing with you that I dont agree with the electoral college.
Perhaps If us citizens knew exactly what and who we vote for, we'd have a better undestanding of how votes are casted in the ballot other than us voting for the "President" but actually voting for the electors of the candidate who really "vote" for us. You've probably have heard of arguments over deteriorating the electoral collage, but if we dont actually vote for our president that we want to be our president then why have a set of electors vote for us when we are tryng to vote for ourselves?
The Electoral Collage is a process of voing for our President along with the Vice President and the electors. This process may be a little overwhelming for some people knowing that they dont actually vote for the wanted President directly, but is a well thoughtout process built by our founding fathes long ago. Maybe there was a reason for not allowing us to really vote for our President diectly instead of having the elecotrs vote for them along with Congress, or even it could have just been a big mess from the beginning that Congress and H.O.R and the Senate have been fixing. The Electoral College consists of 538 electors i n which only 270 of those votes count into electing a Pesident. The author, Bradford Plumer, of the article "Source 2: The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of he system are wrong" tells us a little of how the system isnt what we really think it is. "Under the electorla college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slae of electors, who in turn elect the president" he asserts. An example Plumer gives us is that if you lived in Texas at the time of John Kerry, when he was running ofr pesident, you would have voted for a group of 34 Democratic electos who would then have voted for Kerry in retun to votin for his electors. A question is, who are these so-called electors? Electors are anyone who doesnt hold puplic office. Who picks the electors? Mostly depends on the state for that job. In that case, in choosuing your electors, they hold presidential conventions, a state party central committee, and even the presidential candidates themselves can pick who his electors are. Including the fact that voters cant always control whom their elctos vote for.
The single best argument against the electoral college is the disaste factor. A disaster factor can be in th form of a tie. If two candidates go into a tie, then the "tie braker," as most people refer it as, it gets sent to the House of Representatives (H.O.R) where state delegations vote on the president; and the senate would choose the vice president. At the most basic level, he electoral college is unfair fo voters. The winner-take-all system in each state, makes it sort of easier fo candidates to get most votes. Which is what you would call the "swing states." During the 2,000 campaign, seventeen staes didnt see the candidates at all, including the state of Rhode Island and Sount Carolina and 25 of the biggest media marcketing companies didnt get to see not one ad from the campaign ads. Its pretty straight forward from here. The electoral college is an unfair system, outdated, and irrational. We basically only have assertions against it. Probably wont even be enough to say that the electoral college is unfair, but is enough to say just for the good of the people.
Knowing that citizens votes have no effect really towards the president, then people would be most likely to not wathc the campaigns during he election season of it all. Therefor, the electoral college, once again, is not a great way of electing our president. | 3 |
Imagine a world where there were less accidents, less pollution, and faster transportation for everyone. This may sound too good to be true, however this just might be a reality in the near future. Many car manufacturers have been pushing to have autonomous care be developed and sold. While some people may not be convinced by these claims, autonomous cars are a stepping stone towards a safer world. The main reasons why these cars would be beneficial for our future are increased safety, less pollution, and faster transportation.
The first advantage is safety. Who doesn't want to live in a safer world? Autonomous cars can greatly incresase the safety of transportation. If we all got autonomous cars that were all programmed nearly the same, they would drive themselves in a safe way and less accidents would occur. For example, many deaths occur in the U.S. due to drunk driving or wreckless driving, however, with these autonomous cars we can prevent these factors from claiming lives.
Next, less pollution is a wonderfully positive characteristic of these cars. These autonomous cars use half of today's taxis. This would decrease the amount of fossil fuels being burned which will greatly decrease pollution caused by automobiles. If these autonomous cars were to be fuled by some other resourse that harms the environment little to not at all, pollution would drastically decrease. In the future cars may never cause pollution again. This would help us conserve our planet and insure that our children's children will live in a safe world.
Finally, the last reason why autonomous vehicles are a good idea is faster transportation. If someone were on a road trip,
on their way to an important meeting out of state, or if your just extreamly tired in the morning, autonomous cars can help. Human navigation is required in some situations, however it may not come up that often. If you ever get tired while driving for many hours, the autonomous cars can help take you to your destination. This insures faster transportation and increases safety. Many people have to drive for many hours a day, when these people start to get tired they slowly drift into sleep, this could cause many accidents. Autonomous cars can eliminate this problem immediatly and it will also increase the amount of time you drive so you can get to your destination faster.
Clearly autonomous cars are the way of the future. It may take a while for these cars to be developed, but the advantages are too great to over look. We can saves lives with the save autonomous technology the cars use to drive themselves. We can save our planet by creating less pollution and we can travel longer and faster. We should encourage car manufacturers to create these cars so we can life a better life. | 3 |
The Electoral College is a process made by the founding fathers for the election of presidents by the Congress's vote. The Electoral College is a process, but it is an unfair process. Americans are supposed to vote for who they desire to be president, not a group of electors in Congress. There is no possible way for Americans to choose their president if at the end of it all, a group of electors make the final choice. According to the Office of the Federal Register, Americans choose the state electors when voting for President because when voting for president, Americans are actually voting for the candidate's electors. It makes no sense then to vote for a president, let's just make it to where we vote for electors because we obviously aren't voting for who we want as president.
The main purpose of voting is to help the candidate American voters want as president to win the election. If popular vote was the way to determine who would be elected as President, everybody would be happy. There are times in an election when everybody is sure that the candidate they voted for is going to win. Americans watch as they see the votes go up by popular vote, but then later, the candidate they thought would win has lost because of the Electoral College. If popular vote was the way Presidents were elected, everything would be made easier without controversy. However, since the Electoral College does play a big role in the election of presidents, popular vote is never going to be a working system. Americans just need to figure out that their vote is never going to really count, but the Electoral College's vote surely will.
In an article by Bradford Plumer, the fact that over sixty percent of voters would prefer a direct election than how we vote now is stated. The Electoral College System is based on Americans voting for the electors that are the candidate's party. When Americans go to vote, they vote for electors who support the President and then the electors choose the president. When Americans go to vote, the banners should just say Vote For Electors. When Americans vote, it is made to seem as they are voting directly for the President they want to be elected. Instead, Americans are actually voting for electors. Multiple times you'll hear the saying, "Every vote counts." but really, every vote does not count. No matter how many times Americans vote for their President, the Electoral College has the final say no matter what American's votes are.
The major problem that worries many, is the problem of a tie in the electoral vote. During an election when a tie occurs, the state delegations vote for who will be president. According to the article The Indefensible Electoral College by Bradford Plumer, each state is able to cast one vote and the one single state representative makes the decision for the state. If the point of an election is for the people to vote and choose, there shouldn't even be a option for the one representative to choose. All the votes that were just cast by Americans all go down the drain now. In the case of a tie, all the power and weight goes to the one state representative to choose who becomes the president. The represtative does not care about what the people want, that representative will choose what they want to do with this election. According to Bradford Plummer, during the 2000 campaign, Rhode Island, South Carolina and fifteen other states did not even get to view media markets or campaigns and did not even get to see the candidates. Those states howeve still voted, not knowing anything about these candidates because overall the Electoral College makes the last call.
The Electoral College is an unfair process that also plays a big role in elections. No matter how Americans vote, the Electoral College is going to be the people who elect the president. Americans vote for who they want as their president but the Electoral College simply makes that decision for you. Americans shouldn't even vote, the Electoral College can make that decision. Many people in America simply want the popular vote than to have the process of Electoral College in place. We should all take a vote to abolish the Electoral College. But wait, the Electoral College might say no since they always make the overall decision. | 4 |
The Electoral College is how America votes for the President and Vise President, which is a process that the U.S. shouldn't have. Intially, if people are voting for a President, they know what they want and have done their research. Along with that, it gives the Electorial College more rights than the actually people voting for the President and Vise President. Lastly, it's just down right unfair to the voters. The U.S. wants every person to have equal chance at the election for a president and if about 500 people are voting compared to the millions, it's just unfair to the citizens. In the world now, this process is taking away the freedom of decision or making it seem useless to the people. The Electorial College shouldn't be a process we use for voting.
Most people voting, actually care who is running the country and they took the effort to make sure they got the vote in. The votes from the actually people should count because, evidentally, they know what they want. Most people do not go to a place if they do not care for the purpose, but if citizens are voting for their president, it should count, not having other elected officials vote. The elected officials voting, are in the government and that creates a biased vote which is uncalled for. The votes need to be from the people because they see the actual truths of what is happning to the economy, salary, taxes, the process of the government, and much more. It is obvious that having the people vote is a more efficient choice than pre-elected officials.
Secondly, the Electorial college takes away the rights to choose what president they want. Yes, they get to vote for which electoral college member they want but, it doesn't actually add up to the number the citizens actually participate in. As stated in the Constitution, citizens of America have freedom, and they should have the freedom of choosing the Preseident and Vice President they want without out any ifs,ands, or buts. America has the freedom to choose and the Electorial College shuts it all down, which is disrespect to citizens and to the country.
Lastly, it is such an unfair process. As said previously, it geneuinly takes our freedom of choice away. People need to be heard and listened for what they actually want but the government lives their own way and doesn't take into count what the people, that make the country up, want. "Because of the winner-takes-all system in each state, candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states."(The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the laid-back defenses of the syster are wrong by Bradford Plumer). This here proves that the candidates are only in for the game and not the real true choice in who will be a perfect official that runs the country all together. Clearly, the process all together is a complete unfair, brutial game to the people.
In Retrospect, having the Electorial College is a disaster and having it as a process makes we use every four years is unbelieveable. It treats the Americans like there freedom is worthless and makes the voting process unfair. If the people take the time to actually stand in line to vote, they hould earn the right of having their vote count in full picture. This process shouldn't continue on, for it is 500 or so people voting for the President and Vise President for over millions. That itself, is outragious and shouldn't be apart of the American voting process anymore. | 3 |
In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author writes about the idea of exploring Venus. The author mentions many obstacles, that make the exploration of Venus hard, but he also talks about why it is important for us to explore the planet.
One of the most important reasons, to explore Venus, is the fact that Venus could once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. The author writes
"Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life". The author also brings out the fact, that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit.
In Paragraph 8 the author writes about how exploring the planet would not just be for the information, but to feed the curiosity that humans naturally have. According to the authors opinion, if we can defeat the problem that is exploring Venus, we will be more confident and innovative facing equally intimidating endeavors in the future. The author expresses his opinion about exploring by saying
"Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expnded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation."
So in Paragraph 4, when the author says "The value of returning to Venus seems indisputable" he means that the insight we would gain and the satisfaction of feeding our curiosity makes Venus a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. I truly hope,that the challenge of exploring Venus will be defeated, because it could possibly change the way we see our World. | 2 |
Everyone has dreamed about aliens living on mars at least once in their life. As exciting as it would be to discover living beings on mars, there is no evidnece today that would support that theory. Here at NASA, we have been debating this topic for more than thirty years. The Face could not have been created by aliens because there are no alien markings and there are landforms very similar to the Face here on Earth.
When analyzing a digital image, you can dicern things 3 times larger than the actual pixel size. If aliens had created the Face, there would be some kind of marking that the aliens would have made. On our 2001 trip to the big red planet, we used our best cameras with their absolute maximum resolution. The images that we took showed no sign of any martian markings. This proves that aliens could not have created the Face on Mars.
Here on Earth we have many different types of landforms. One of which looks very similar to the Face on Mars. This landform is called a Mesa. These landforms here weren't created by living beings. They were created by natural causes, like erosion. So, since the landforms here weren't made by creatures, why would the landform on Mars have been made by creatures? There is no evidence that proves the Face could have been created by alien life forms.
In conclusion, although everyone here on Earth would love to discover that the Face was created by aliens, there is no evidence that can prove that theory. There are not any alien markings and there are landforms on Earth that look very similar to the Face on Mars. | 2 |
Dear Senator,
On the issue of keeping the Electoral College or changing to election by popular vote, I think it is both necessary and unnecessary to keep it the way even if it has been since the founding fathers established it in the Constitution many years ago. The electoral college consists of 538 electors. It only requries 270 of those votes to become the winner of the Electoral College. electorla college is good for the voting process by allowing the qulified people to vote for who they want in office. If we get rid of electoral college then we might not have as many well educated people voting for who gets put in office.
Even if we have the electoral college that dosnt always mean that we will for sure win the election. In 2000 Al Gore won the popular votes but did not win the presidency. There are just a few things that would maybe make the electoral college a little unfair. The state voters do not directly vote for the president, they vote for the electors, who in return vote for the president. State electors are chosen by,sometimes going to state conventions ,the state's party's committee, or even sometimes the presidential canditdates themselves. So with that being said it may be unfair to vote straight for electors and just vote for the president directly. Another thing that would make it unfair because of the "winner takes all" system in every state candidates them selves dont spend time in the states that they are repersenting.
What happens if there is a tie in the voting of the electors? In a case like that it would go to the house of repersentatives. If we do it by popular vote than we would not have to worry about there being a tie. People would be able to vote for who they wanted and that would be settled before it even started. If you think that a tie is not likely well in 1976 a tie would have happened if just a small number of votes, 5,559 would have just voted the other way. So saying that the electorla collage way of doing it has its upsides and its down sides. It is outdated and irrational. | 2 |
All over the world idea's of limiting car usage. In Vauban Germany 70 percent of Vauban's families do not own a car. Heidrum Walter said "When I had a car I was ALways tense. I'm much happier this way." In Paris they ban driving due to smog. Paris made some changes and Paris's congestion was down 60 percent in the capital france. Bogota, Colombia had a huge turnout on free-car day. The goal is to reduce smog violators and promote alternative transportation. Even in America, recent studies show fewer cars are being bought and less driving each year goes by. MIcheal Sivak said "I think that means something more fundamental is going on."
In Germany residnets in the suburban area are buying fewer cars. In this one community they are completely car free. The community is near the french and swiss borders. The surburban life is being adopted by public transportation with less space for parking and more space for stores and walk ways on main streets.
Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. Motorists with odd or even license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home and if they did not listen they would be fined 22-euro ($31 dollars). Diesel fuel was blamed, since france has a tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline. Even though Paris has more smog than any other European capitals. The smog cleared on monday and for the ruling the French party banned odd-numbered plates on Tuesday.
Millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took the buses to work on free-car day. The goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce their smog aswell. The turnout was large despite the gray clouds and rain. The day still went on has free-car day. Carlos Arturo said "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution and they have done just that.
In America recent studies show that Americans are buying fewer cars and driving less. This is good and bad. Only because the pollution rate is dropping and that is a good thing but the bad thing is the American car ownerships are losing money. In New York the new bike-sharing program is skyrocketing because of the fewer cars being sold. The end of car culture is coming to an end and the time to change for the better is coming. One step at a time we can fix our mistakes with the pollution we started. | 2 |
Dear Senator,
I think we should change our voting method from the Electoral College to popular vote. The Electoral College consists of only 538 people. That's pretty much saying 538 people in America get to choose who our next president is. I think it should be set up by popular vote because their are millions of people in the U.S. that are able to vote, and each individual person's vote should count. The Electoral College is wrong because if there are about 100,000 people voting in a state, and 60,000 people vote for the Democratic side, and 40,000 votes for the Republican side, the Electoral College votes will go to the Democratic president and those other 40,000 Republicans would have voted for nothing. The Electoral College is one of the main reasons half of America doesn't vote. If one state wins the Republican electoral votes every single year, the Democrats will just stop voting. Then most of the Republicans will stop voting because they know they will win, and this will happen in every state until about 25% of America is voting, or possibly less. The popular vote gives evrybody a chance to win.
I do think the Electoral College is better in some ways though. First of all, the Electoral College is full of people that know why they're voting. They know about their candidates and what their candidates are going to do for the U.S. Most of the population that votes in the popular vote don't know why they're voting. They vote simply on if somebody is black or white, Democratic or Republican. I bet if most of America's voters did some research on their candidates, the polls would be very different. I think another good thing about the Electoral College is that the bigger the population of a city, the more Electoral votes it has. If you win the Electoral Vote, you are most likely going to win the popular vote. And another plus side is that a candidate can not rely on a single region to win. He has to be in the favor of multiple regions in order to win the Election. These are some reasons against the thought of popular vote.
Sincerely, PROPER_NAME | 2 |
A Face was just found on Mars. Some believe that it was created by aliens. They don't have proof to show that it was created by aliens. Therefore, the Face is just a natural landform.
There are a great deal of reasons to believe that the Face is just a natural landform. First, what evidence do the people that say it was created by aliens have. To make people believe that te Face was created by aliens, they have to have something to prove it. Then, there are comparisons to landforms on Earth that are very similar to the Face that was found on Mars. They also have no alien markings to prove that aliens made the landform.
There are many reasons to support my claim. Some say that it was too cloudy to see any markings. But the "Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look." The spacecraft was rolled 25 degrees to center the Face in the field of view. The team had an "extrodinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution." Using a camera that good, people would be able to see anything resembling any alien markings.
Using this evidence, peolple should believe that the Face is just a natural landform. The people who go against this have no proof of the landform being created by aliens. Go with the facts, not unproven theories. | 2 |
Do you wanna know how people feel about the driverless cars, well here is more information. My argument for this passage is I am against the devolpment of these new driverless cars. Some of the reasons I am against the devolpment is because i feel its a waste of money, still requires a driver, and saftey. If they are not completely driverless and safer than the normal cars would be qhy should we devolp them. These are the reasons of why I am against the development of the driverless cars.
One of the reason I am against the devolpment of the driverless cars is because it could become a waste of money. The way it could waste money is by the number of production have to be made to supply the world with one which involves a lot of material. Also if the computer fails at some point and people crash then there is a higher chance that the manufacters would get sued. As it states in the reading that if the technology fails and somone is injuired who is at fault-the driver or the manufacter. This is the reasons how its a waste of money follows in line with being against the devolpment of the driverless cars.
Aonther reason i am against the devolpment of driverless cars is because they are not all the way driverless. The driver has to take over at some point in time. One reason they would have to is if the car senses danger the driver is suppose to take control. It states that there has to be a driver in the car. This is the reasons how i am against the driverless cars because its not complety driverless.
Last but not least reason of why im against the development of the driverless cars is because of safety. They are not really going to be that safe because of the driver will be entertained so they arent bored which will cause them not be alert so if they have to take over they wont know what to do. Its states this in the reading that BMW stated in paragraph eight or nine. They may be better for enviroment but not for peoples health concerns. This is the reasons where i feel the car lacks safety and this is why im against the devolpment of the driverless cars.
In conclusion, I have listed some of the main ideas of why im against the devolpment of the driverless cars. I aslo had followed and supported those ideas with details from the articles. I had came up with the reasons im against the devoplment is because of waste of money, not to proper about being totally driverless, and the safety features. This is my arguement of why im against the devolpment of the driverless cars. | 3 |
The author supports the idea of studying venus with ahuge ammount of facts. like that venus use to be able to hold life like eartdid or that its super hot and too hot to put anything from earth on beacsue it will melt but personally i think that the author had no point in what he worte. he made it clear that no one can with stande 170 degree temperature and that no metal is gping to be able to withstand the heat either. so with that temerature no human life and no robot could go to venus. right? no. the author also made it clear that venus was like our twin and it use to have charestics like pur plant.
From the water covering the planet to the air. but now venus has a thick aptmosphere and we could never live on venus. that not the only reason though there is no water source its to hot and we couldnt breatth beacsue of how this the aptmosphereis in venus.
We nor no animal could withstand the heat on venus but the author argued that we could but in all reality we couldnt and it sint even a smart idea NASA is putting money into to something that wont worl and its pointless beacus eit 170 degrees and no one wants that. wed die. metal will melt and until we come up with non melting metal no one will live on venus | 1 |
There are many advantages to limiting car usage .
Even though cars are becoming more advanced for using as little fossil fuels and energy as possible we should try not to use them as often as we do. Cars are not as needed as we make them out to be there are a lot more types of transportation that we can choose from for example a train, a taxi, or a bicycle.
To begin with, out of all the good cars do for us they also do some harm by polluting the atmosphere and the Earth. Passenger cars are responsible for greenhouse gas emissions in Europe and some areas in the United States as cited in source 1. Long term car usage causes smog which happened in the capital of France which caused car traffic to go down 60 percent which is found in source 2. Cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emissions as found in source 2.
Now that technology has advanced there's not much need to drive to places to communicate with friends and family or do other activities. You can communicate with people through all types of social media which keeps you from having to waste gas to drive to the houses of your friends or family members. Cell phones and other electronics can now be used to pay bills or any other charges that need to be paid for and keep you from leaving the house. There's many apps for car-pooling that has facilitated more flexible commuting arrangements and include the evolution of shared van services for getting to work as found in source 4.
All the new types of transportation that are available now a days make it unnecessary to drive your car everywhere. In major cities there are various train stations or bus stops you can catch a ride on which helps reduce rush hour as found in source 3. Since the mid-1990s an improvement campaign began in Bogota which ended with the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths where people ride through and have a day made specifically for it which is cited in source 3. In Vauban people walk because stores are placed a walk away, or on a main street, rather than in malls along some distant highway as found in source 1.
To summarize it all up there's many more ways of transportation that help keep the environment safe and help limit driving for example riding a bicycle, walking, and taking a train or bus. These are only a small amount of choices and there are many more to choose from so why not limit driving cars and do one of these other choices to help the environment and ourselves. | 2 |
"When you vote for your candidate you are actually voting for your candidate's electors."
This shouldn't be the way candidates win. The election should change, the candidates should earn their votes, win by popular vote.
If the process of voting changes to "win by popular votes" then at least the candidate would win fairly. If you think about it, wouldn't you want to win fair and square? don't you think you should earn your votes? or in general, if you think people should earn their votes then you should get an understanding of what is trying to be explained here.
I'm not the only one that thinks that the election should be by popular vote;
"over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now."
plenty of other people think we should vote directly instead of having the Electoral College system.
Nobody wants to vote for other people other than the one running for President, well at least 60 percent of the people don't.
The electoral college is unfair and it is why I think the election should count by popular vote. The electoral college is unfair because sometimes candidates don't a have chance to visit states so it's difficult to gain votes from those states the people who vote aren't really voting, it's the electors who are a large state gets more attention from presidental candidates in a campaign than a small state does (basically what I meant in reason 1)
The point here is, I think we should get rid of the Electoral College since it has been proven that it is unfair and just have a fair voting system from now on. Maybe put on a debate to see what people would prefer. | 2 |
Have you ever been in class and started to get bored with an assignment? Well the new F.A.C.S (Facial Action Coding System) may be able to help.
The F.A.C.S sytem is able to tell how you are feeling by reading the muscles in your face. The F.A.C.S system atrificially makes a 3-D model of your face with all 44 muscles. Those muscles are what help control your facial features for example, smiling, frowning and scowling. The F.A.C.S system is able to decode what muscles are being used to show how you are feeling.
The argument about having F.A.C.S in our school systems today is that it is constantly reading our childrens faces without them knowing. People say this is an invasion of privacy for example if a child is at home and has left their computer out when they went to go to the restroom and a parent walks up and looks at the screen it could have some teachers thinking that the students parent is doing the work for them.
I say this argument is invalid because a lot of people don't know that Google has a system in place similar to F.A.C.S where it will listen in on what people are saying and show advertisements that correnspond with that. Another thing Google does that is similar to F.A.C.S is that when you are browsing it will track what you click on and then provide advertisements for those things as well. Another example of things tracking us without knowing is that they're reports that the FBI has monitored people through their webcams if they are under suspect. With this knowledge what is the odds a hacker or someone with computer knowledge has not done this to other people as well? This is why I say the argument is invalid for F.A.C.S not to be in our school systems today.
The other side of this argument that I can support is that sometimes our kids are having bad days and with F.A.C.S monitoring them it causes them to get advertisements that make their days even worse. This could possibly cause our kids to not want to use the internet that has helped them so much and is a facle point in most schools today. Another reason why F.A.C.S might be bad for schools is that it can teach our kids how to fake an emotion to be able to hide something from us or be able to cheat the system and be able to get what they want. This is some of the reasons why F.A.C.S might be bad in our school systems.
Being bored in school can come easy at times, so the F.A.C.S system may be able to help your kid one day by making their day better. By being able to moniter the facial expressions our children have. Hopefully one day F.A.C.S can be used for crimes, mysteries, and even enjoyment;but for now it is a good sytem that is helpful for few but the help it provides is great. | 2 |
In this essay I will be giving an argument on why this so called "face" is not made by aliens.
The prompt tells you that one of your colleagues says that it is created by aliens.
My job in this essay is to tell why it isn't and give an explanation.
The figure that NASA saw was a so called "face on mars".
They claimed that it was in the shape of a human head and it was thought to be made by aliens.
In my oppinion this is not made by aliens.
Here is a reason why.
All these years NASA has gone to a two or three planets looking for aliens.
Throughout the years how many have we found, none!
Yes, we may have found some traces of aliens, but we can not prove that these are actually alien tracks, or alien lifeforms.
There is no way to prove that this structure was made by aliens, unless we have images of them, and so far we have none.
Look down on earth.
How many mesas or Buttes do we have in America, or even around the world?
Now think about this, were these man made?
No, none of these land formations were man made!
They are formed naturally by nature.
Now over the years we have found a lot of reasons how Mars is sort of like the earth.
It carries water, and it is one of the easiest planets to get to, so if you think about it, Mars could have the same land formations as we do!
Nature is a beautiful thing, and it more than likely made this so called "face".
Yes, you may be right in some way.
Yes, we have found traces of aliens over the years.
This COULD have been made by aliens.
Maybe they are trying to connect to other life outside of their planet.
That is the only argument that you have against me.
The argument that isn't even factual.
You are going off of a guess in your mind.
So overall in this essay I have covered three thing.
I have covered my first argument, which is that we have not found aliens even though we have been searching all of these years.
I have covered my second argument, which is that nature has formed many structures like this on earth, it could have been formed out of the land.
And I also covered the rebuttle, which is that there is a possibility that this was built by aliens because we have found traces.
So in conclusion, this structure was not built by humans, this was land made. | 2 |
"The Face on Mars"
On May 24 2001, a NASA spacecraft discovered a shadow in the shape of a human face. Some scientist believed that the face was caused by aliens, but many others believed that it was just a natural landform. Mesa's and butte's are two types of natural landforms. They are very common around Cydonia.
Around May, NASA put the image on the interenet for everyone to view. The caption of the picture said it was a huge rock with the ILLUSION of a face. An illusion is a when someone plays a trick on your eyes,this means it could look like a face but be an mesa. The way a person sees something is based on their own perspective. If one scientist sees a alien shape,another person sees a human face,and the other see a rock it is based on their point of view.
The picture caught alot of attention even by the chief scientist of NASA"s Mars Exploration Program,Jim Gavin. Micheal Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera team came to take pictures of Mars. The used a camera that had better quality than the Viking spacecraft. MOC's picture proved that the Face was only a natural landform. There were people who still thought it was analien so they took another picture. They used a camera that would make the image 3 times its pixel size, this means that if their was anything or size you would see is.
In the end,pictures proved that the Face shaped like a human's turned out to be just a butte or a mesa which was common. Many people are disappointed, but scientist have proven thier theory of ancient civilization on the Red Planet is incorrect. The Face still remains on the planet Mars. There are still many parts of the world that are yet to be discovered. Who knows what is out there? | 2 |
The "Unmasking the Face on mars" was journaled when they sent a drone out into space to take pictures of Planet Mars. When they were on expidition they found a face like thing in the ground luckily the drone was able to get a picture and it was a face embeded in the ground. Some people believe that it is an alien but we will never know.
After this broke headlines people started making movies and all, including the newpapers, T.V broadcastings and all. This continued all the way up till 2001. They still monitor the unmasking of the face, it slowly is starting to reveal itself.
What could this face be? Is it an alien or once a human being? Well we won't be finding out maybe for another decade or so, But it;s weird how it was there an nobody knew it was there till there was an expidition for it. Some people as if Planet Earth was created by aliens or not. Truth is we will never know until we keep going on expiditions to keep learning more about the planets. | 0 |
I dont really know why wold they need smarter cars then we already need that would just make everything diffrent more then its alrady is why cant they just make other things that the world really needs . for example bulldings for those that dont have an home,or are living under briges. why cant they make hospitals in other places were thy need them insted of cars that are smart how are they gonna help us we alredy have cars that can transport us why cant they use that technology to make the world better bye making smart cars is not gonna make it better some people are not even gonna be able to buy them because of how expensive they are going to be,how are the rest goona get them ,with what money are they going to buys them. people that are now going to know how to us them are gonna have trouble and even mabe cause a acsident because they dont know how to us them . | 0 |
My argument of this aspects of the driverless cars i'm against it. The future cars may not always work or do come out right with the parts. When no one has to buy cars anymore can become a huge problem. That means that they don't have to pay car payments or anything on the car. How do they work right or how do they get around?
The future with public tansportation system where it has fleets of the driverless cars that form a public-tansport taxi system. The cars take half fo the fuel of the each day taxis and they offer more flexability than a bus. I wouldn't want to pay half of fuel taxis each day. He beleives that it's going to change the world. When it changes the world. People are going to complain because of the issuses that they are going to have with the future driverless cars.
When people watch televison or movies for how long they want with these care that could drive themsevles. How would the car know that movie is over and you want to go home and the car isn't back on time? Google cars shouldn;t have to drive indepently because it just makes people lazy all the time. There is pretty much a robot that you have to take care of everyday like a child.
The driverless cars may not know what they are dealing with when they leave the house with the person. People are just putting their life in danger with these driverless cars. Most people would be late to work, apportiments, etc. It can cause traffic issues, such as navigating through the roadwork or cause accidents. They should not send the future with driverless cars because it will cause way too many issuses for everybody. | 1 |
Luke has crossed on the atlantic ocean 16 times. It took him about two weeks to get there and back. He took care of the anmials on the crossing so that kept him busy most of the time. There is good things that happend and some bad things that happen with becoming a seagoing cowboy.
First, you need to be trained if u are not trained then why would you even go in the first place. You need to stay fit, u need to be able to survie with out food incase you run out or run out of water. Helping out on his aunts farm helped him get in shape and prepared for a real adventure. On his seconed trip he was the night watchman . That does not take so much hardwork but staying up is the key. He had to check on the animals every hour, and then tell about his hourly report. But he could not work for a while because he broke one of his ribs.
Next, he did not just go to help people even know that was his main priorty. he also went to see all thease beaituful places the would have been arriving to.
Then, they would still have fun on board it is not as bad as u think. You still get to play baseball and volleyball games where all the animals had been staying will they were on board. They played thease games to pass time, table - tennis tourmants, fencing, boxing, reading, and whittling.
last, of all the cattle boat trips, were unbelievable opportiny for a small - town boy he says. Beside helping people getting to travel areound the world it was just brethtaking. Most of his trips were a susses I enjoyed the trips and can't wait for more.
To sum up my thoughts, I think he should go u still get fun out of this trip it is not like you have to work all day and night. He endeded up going and he had a great time. He said in this passage it opended up a whole new world for me. From day one crossing the atlantice ocean. I new right then and there this was a oppurtuntiy of a life time. | 2 |
Driverless cars would truly be an immense change in the daily lives of every driver in the world. A future where getting a license is no longer heard of and taking driving tests would just be a part of history would be the effect of these cars. Imagine how current parents and grandparents say how they grew up without televisions or cell phones, later on they will be saying how they had to drive their own car, and it will be mind blowing to everyone's future children.
My personal opionion on driverless cars is against them. I don't see how it is necessary for all cars to be re-done and have so much work put in to the idea of driverless cars, when we could just simply drive them ourselves. I don't see the importance of it. I believe to have a license and be capable of driving is a grand achievement. Every child looks forward to the day they can pass, first their permit test, and then later on, their driver's test. What happens when the driverless car stops working and is only able to drive with an actual driver? The skill of driving is very important, and it would be a shame to see that skill no longer necessary to learn in the future.
I can think of many more downfalls to the driverless car than positives. Not to mention, the amount of problems that can come about with these vehicles. If the car suddenly goes out of control or the car has to pull in a driveway? The driver will need to take over. I don't see a high possibility of these cars becoming available considering the innumerable amount of mishaps that happen when driving.
The article mentioned that automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems ahead will be solved, but how can they be positive? Things can easily go wrong with this make, and to me, the effect isn't worth the risk. Car crashes are very harmful things mentally and physically to a human being and who's to say driverless cars will stop them?
In conclusion, i can't picture driverless cars being the official cars of the future. In order for them to have their full use, everyone would have to have a driverless car. Expenses, weariness of the model, and people who aren't willing to give their driving ability up wil be the ones to put a stop to driverless cars. I think some may own a driverless car, but there will never be a time when driverless cars are the only cars being used. | 2 |
I'm against driverless cars because i feel like that letting a drone take over your car and drive for you is dangerous. This idea is not good because it would cost a lot of money to produce and not a lot of people would buy the cars since they are so expensive so therefore they wont be making much profit from it.
It's dangerous in someways because if you just let the robot do the drivng then it would propbably take you to another destination. If it stoped working for some odd reason then the person who isn't driving could be in serious danger because if they are not paying any attention to the road then they could get in an accident and get seriously hurt' and who would be responsible for the accident you may ask? The robot becuase they are supposed to be driving you and making it safe for you while you can do something else, The company who built the car would get sued because they say that its supposed to be safe, but being safe on the road is just you paying attention to the road not lettig some robot do it for you.
Sticking to drivng yourself is much better and cheaper becuase you won't have to spend so much money ona car that does that for you. Imagine having this technology in a super car now that would be really dangerous and stupid because the drone could fully take over of the car and start speeding, and supercars are meant for those type of things, but not on a public road you would be putting evryones lifes in danger. My conclusion is that driverless cars are not great idea, maybe for the greater future but for now not really. | 1 |
Cars are changing now more than ever before. Some of the changes that cars are going through are good while some of them aren't so good. We need cars to get places. In the first paragraph it says "He envisions a future with a public transportation system where fleetd of driverless cars form a public-transport taxi system." Not everyone is comfortable with that and not all people want a public transportation stayem to use. What if they like being alone and away from all the people? Will there still be cars that aren't driverless? Or will the population of cars that need to be driven not exist anymore?
Going against this is better thasn being for it. Most people spent a lot of time and money getting there license and taking classes to learn how to drive and then that all just gets taken away by driverless cars or transportation syatems. It's not the best idea to do that. What if the driverless items don't get used? It would cost lots of money and people would lose there jobs because of this like taxi drivers, bus drivers, and people that teach drivers ed; but it's good that cars do have the "Traffic Jam Assistant" or other things in their car that help prevent accidents and other things of that sort. We need things like the Traffic Jam Assistant because it helps people out for example in paragraph seven it says that The car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel." That means that it could save a persons life. By just having a sensor in your car can help save your life that's the kind of thing that we need in cars today.
So instead of having driverless cars why don't we put systems like the Traffic Jam Assistant in cars to help people out. It;s really pointless to go out of your way and spend so much money to create something that we don't even know will work yet last. So what if the power went out in the city and then the "back up" generator kicked in then it got shut down by the big storm. What would happen to the people that have to go get their kids of are already out doing things and need to get home to see if their families are okay. What do you do then if there are no regular cars and the power doesnt work nothing does? That's why we don't need driverless cars and or transpotation systems. | 3 |
The author states that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The first reason that supports this idea is by stating that Venus has caught the attention of astronomers because it was once a planet like earth. Second, another reason that supports this idea is NASA wants to have a better insight of the ground conditions of Venus and studying them better. The third reason is NASA has been trying to invent a way for humans or technology to survivethe conditions in Venus and studying Venus more without risking anyones life.
The first reason that supports the idea that studying Venus is a worhty pursuit despite the dangers it presents is the author states that Venus has caught the attention of many astronomers because long ago Venus was a planet like earh. Venus "was covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like earth" stating that Venus was a planet that had lots of different forms of life and that astronomers are amazed and are wanting to discover more about Venus." Furthermore, recall that Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel," this quote states that Venus is the planet that can be the nearest to us and that it would benefit NASA a lot because although this planet is pretty dangerous to be in it would help NASA learn and discover things about Venus and how to be there without risking their lifes.
The second reason that supports this idea is NASA wants to have a better insight on ground conditions and studying them better. " More imporantly, reseachers cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from distance. Therefore, scientists seeking to conduct a thorough mission to undersatnd Venus..." this quote states that NASA has realized that they can't get simples of any kind of living life in Venus that could help invent a way to be there without risking anyones life therefore they haven't invented the technology to do that but they are working on it althought they know there are risks. "Many researchers are working on innovations that could allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus" the quote here states again that researchers are working on finding technolgy that will allow their machines to last longer in Venus so that they can see and study for themselves Venus but are they are also cautions that sending those machines could maybe not work.
The thrid reason that supports this idea is NASA is taking different approaches to studying and learning aboust Venus. " Some simplifed electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested ina chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions,"
the quote here states that NASA is coming up with new inventions to study Venus without taking the risk of going actually there. Its also states that they had invented a kind of electronic that will last there up to three weeks in Venus. "Another project is loking back to an old technology called mechanical computers," the quotes states that NASA is looking back to technology that was used during world war 2 could be useful for studying Venus.
In concludsion the author supports the idea that studying Venus is worthy pursuit despite the dangers real well by giving examples. Even though there are many risks into going to Venus there is many reasons why to take those risks. Astronmers could study more about Venus and its similarites to earth. It would help NASA discover new forms of life. It would benefit NASA by studying more about the ground conditions in Venus. It would help NASA work on taking different approaches to studying Venus. Instead of just sending a person to Venus and risking their life NASA will have technology that will be able to resist the conditions of Venus and be better prepared. | 3 |
Technology can be good uses for a lot of things in life espiecally for emotional,mental,and physical reasons. Technology has came a long way for many years and it becomes better every single day. Some people think technology is a bad thing but it actually does a lot for people and different sitautions in life. Expression can increase your emotion just as simple as a smile or a quick laugh.
Using the Facial Action Coding System could help improve someones emotional state by quickly seeing what their emotions are and if they are feeling down you can give them a hug and increase their emotions. If the Facial Action Coding System was a real life tool we could see many changes in peoples behaviors as well. Having a good behavior can make a good impact on your life and also a good reputation. The world can be seen as a different place if we all have good behaviors and good emotions because people will be a lot respectful and mindful of other human beings.
If someone used the Facial Action Coding System on other artist's pictures they could see how they felt at the time during the picture. Back when Mona Lisa got her picture taken she could have expierenced many emotions and no one truly knew how she was feeling but now that there is technology people easily can tell how she truly felt. As of today many people are left in their feelings and they don't know how to talk about their problems so they just keep them inside. With the technology it would help a lot of people express their feelins without feeling embarassed or scared. | 2 |
Mapping the Thoughts of Students
In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile," advancing technology used for recognizing human emotion is suggested for use in the classroom. By having a computer be able to register the emotions of a student and adjust the lesson accordingly using a program called Facial Action Coding System, student productivity will excel, and the stress felt by teachers will ease.
Lessons, for as long as education has existed, have been adjusted accordingly to the audience by the tutors. For instance, a teacher may observe their students leaning forward in interest of the lesson, and may continue based off of that subject. Others may see students slump in their chairs, or watch with glossy, bored eyes, and will attempt to reconnect with the class. Facial recognition is already common. "In fact, we humans perform this same impressive "calculation" every day (Paragraph 5)." But it is done ineffectively in the classroom due to one person teaching twenty others. A computer is unbiased, and only focuses on one body: The user. By reading and calculating the most subtle changes in one's face, beyond what the naked eye can see, a computer is able to follow "emotion algorithms" and change the lesson's strategy "...like an effective human instructor (Paragraph 6)." The lesson becomes personalized, benefiting the student greatly, as if they had their own private tutor. "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication (Paragraph 6)." The student will understand quicker and learn at a greater rate than if they simply sat and listened to an adult stand at the front of the classroom.
In turn, this student productivity will drastically lower the stress and pressure a teacher will feel over their students. Teachers, more often than not, truly care if their students understand what is being taught and want to see them succeed. Teachers, however, do not have the time to focus on each student individualy. By watching a student fail, a teacher feels as if they themselves are failing. With emotion tracking classroom computers, each student has a better chance of succeeding. A student, who has mastered balancing chemical equations, will no longer have to 'start back at square one' with another student who knows nothing of math or chemistry. Students who fall behind more often will be more equal with their quicker classmates. On a whole, the class itself will be more productive, and the teacher may even be able to move on and prepare more advanced lessons. "By weighting the different units, the software can even identify mixed emotions (Paragraph 4)." The focus the computer has on the student can be greater, and more effective, than what a single adult can provide. Teachers will feel more at ease knowing their students have the 'attention' they need for more challenging subjects.
Facial recognition is not a new concept, and has existed even before the invention of computers. Efficiency is what has been changing, and for the better. If computers, able to recognize and adapt according the user's emotions, better a student's productivity and reduce a teacher's stress, Facial Action Coding Systems are of great value in the classroom. | 5 |
Is the Electoral College fair and right? This system is composed of the selection of the electors, the meeting of electors, and the counting of congress. This systen includes various methods like the "winner take all" system that gives the presidency to the winning candinate of the eletors votes. One very important thing in this system is trust, you have to trust the electors that you voted for to make the right choice. This system of eletor votes is very useful for picking the country's leaders.
The winner take all method is very intresting indeed. The electoral votes decide who wil get what, who will win. Popular vote in no longer in "session" or popular, the electoral votes decide it now. For example, in the 2000 election, when Gore had a lot more popular votes than Bush, but Gore had less electoral votes, it was a shocking suprise for the nation, it seemed to be like more people liked Gore than Bush. One very important thing to consider is ... the reason why Bush won, there is a huge diffrence between making a good choice, aka Gore, and and making the right choice, aka Bush!
Trust, its possibliy one of the most hard things to do in life, but in this system its necessary. Its very significant that you put your trust in the slate of people's hands that you and a whole variety of woried people selected. Trust should not just be handed oveer like anything, its should be earned just like respect, vote in the candinate that you trust.
Popular vote is kind of fair in a way because we can all vote like independent citizens.
Sometimes the electoral candinates vote against the people that elected for them and go for what they think is right which in no case is incorrect but a hudreds of citizens were counting on them to make their choice. We all have a voice, we have to use it in the fair way, and the righthous way is mostly a popular vote, but popular vote is not as efficent as eletoral votes.
The Electoral College is right but not fair, althought it has its benifets, its has its defaults as well. In the end we all decide our own fate, but together we must work together to rebuild what has been broken. We must decide on the correct, on the right leader, the leader that will make great choices for us, the leader that will lead this unique, beautiful, and magnificent country to greatness like never befroe seen, and we must be there with that leader every step of the way. Not everyone will expericence greatness but we sure will be part of it!! | 2 |
Having a computer that can tell what you are feeling can and can't be a good thing. Like you could be sad or depressed and not want anyone to know but they computer does. It can send information to people and you didn't want those people knowing how you are feeling. This can cause problems in a family because it may tell them something they didn't want to know.
First off some people would rather keep to themselves because sometimes showing their real self can hurt others. You can always fake being happy or fake being interested in something that you aren't, but the computer can figure out how you are really feeling and let people know that you aren't interested in the thing they are talking about or happy that someone is talking to you. It can ruin everything between people. The article states that "The facial expressions for each emotion are universal," observes Dr. Huang, "even though individuals often show carying degrees of expression" (Paragraph 4). This is saying that sometimes people don't put much effort into emotions like for instance smiling, sometimes people don't smile as broadly as they would like to.
This is my opinion on being able to have a computer analyze how you are feeling. I think it would be a bad idea and it would be better off to let people keep their feelings to themselves. Computers being able to tell your feelings is a bad idea and shouldn't come to life. We should keep it the same as it is now, where people can be themselves and not worry about people getting scared or hurt by their true selves. | 2 |
Dear Senator,
I believe that rather than having the
Electoral College , we should have elections by popular vote. A popular vote can be a better source of election because it gives the people of the state a better chance to express themselves and have a free, independant country.
The process of the Electoral College consists of a meeting of five hundred-thirty eight selected electors, where they vote for the President and Vice President. This situation can be considered unfair to many people that do not get selected as electors because there opinion is not put into consideration. It is said that over sixty percent of voters would perfer a direct election verses the Electoral College. This statistic goes to show that people do not feel that they are involved in our country. How can you consider this a free and independant nation if we do not all get the privelage to vote?
Sincerely,
PROPER_NAME | 1 |
How would you feel knowing that everytime you went to class to simply get your education that you were being monitered and scanned to see how you were feeling that day? Would you feel like your privacy was invaded? Would you feel judged? I know I personally would feel threatened and exposed. I beleive that the
Facial Action Coding System, a computer program that can identify human emotions, would have no value in a classrom because, it has no practical use in a learning enviorment such as a classroom, it would be an invasion of students privacy, and while it may not be of use in a calssroom, it could be put to use in other fields of work.
I think that this emotion identifing technology would have no practical use in a learning classroom enviorment becasuse teachers have to ensure the material is digested by students no matter what emotinal state they are in. While recogonizing a students emotions could expalin why they may be uninterested in the material it does not change the fact that they still must learn it if they want to further their own education. Therfore, I beleive that this technology would be of no use to both the student and the teacher.
I also beleive that this technology would have no practical use or value in a classroom due to its nature, its a blatant invasion of privacy. Its unfair to the student to be subjected to this indentification of emotion everyday. Some students may feel like their privacy is being invaded just so a teacher could know how they were feeling at that exact moment. Furthermore, students may not want their emotional state to be regonized due to personal reasons such as not wanting others to know they are feeling sad or depressed becasue they don't want others to know becsause they would attempt to reach out and that alone could result in unwanted conflict. This leads me to beleive that this technology holds no value in a classroom.
Finally, I beleive that while this technology may have no practical use or value in a calssroom, it could be put to great use in other fields of work and other aspects of life. For example, in the article researchers use this technology to decipher the emotions of the famous Mona Lisa. This helps them get an understamding of how much the artist knew about facial muscles and expressions, which is useful in learning about how artist learned thier techniques in the past. This technology would be amazing in the enteratinment industry. Futhermore, it could be used for more acurate CGI, which would be useful for movies, tv shows, and video games. Next, I beleive that this technology would be useful for scientific studies. It could help reseraches understand how emotions work and formulate which could help people who have issues with muscles in their face, technology could be developed that could help them express themselves better. Anothe reason why I believe this technology could be put to more practical use in a diffrerent enviorment then a classrom is the applications and uses it could have in solving crimes. Police could use this tech to help decpiher how a criminal is feeling which could bring more evidence to a case.
While this amazing technolgy has many applications outside the classroom, I believe that it has no practical use inside a classroom becaue it has no effect on learning the subject matter in a more efficent manner, and it be an invasion of privacy to the students and possibly the teachers as well. We area already studied and invaded enough by higher ups and people beyond and in the goverment, do we really need our students emotions in a classroom to be put under a microscope as well? | 4 |
I belive that the use of technology that reads a students' emotions in class is not benificial due my belife of it having flaws. Having technology like this one could be benifitcial in some cases but there could be problems. A problem I have in mind is that students can portray fake emotions. Not only that every student is unique and has different facial features.
I know for a fact that students portray fake emotions because i am a student. For example a sudent could have a problem at home and doesn't want to make others feel bad for him/her, so they would fake the emotion of happiness to hide the emotion of anger or sadness. A computer can't read the mind of a human and identify the real emotion they are really feeling.
Not only that! Every one in the world has different facial features. A students nuteral face could look like a face of boredom and cause the lesson to be changed. The computer would not know that because it's based on how the mucles look. I feel that the computer lacks 3-D model of every students' face and its time consuming to get a 3-D model of every student.
Technology that reads emotions is amazing, but i feel that they still won't benfit the students in the classroom due to the fact that it can't distinguish fake emotions over real emotions and also it doesn't know all the facial features there can be. | 2 |
I am going to write a essay about a aticle named A Cowboy Who Rode The Waves BY: Peggy Reif Miller
The reason I would want to participate in this program is because I like going on boat tripps, and you can learn a lot about fishing and it is a good job.
Lukes claims are that he wanted to go seagoing because it is a opportunity of a life time he said. He wanted to go sea going because he likes learning new things, and it sounded fun to him. In agust 1945, Don and Luke received their first orders to go to new orleans.
What I am trying to say is you can learn a lot, go fishing, It is fun, and you can go on really awsome trips. So if you like learning, having fun, and going on awsome trips then join the program Seagoing Cowboys.
Essay by: JESUS | 1 |
people should not waste there oney on something like that because by would peole need to know the emotions of students students are either happy neutral or sad at least thtats my opinion but really something like that just seems like a huge waste of money we dont come to school to talk about our emotionsn we come to school because we need to learn and make new friendsand thats why i think a device that can read emotions is a huge wasste of money. plus it sounds pretty worthless if you ask me if you wanna know if someone is sad or not just ask us and we should answer its that simple theres no need to build something that complicated when you can just ask them youself theres really no need for something thats that complicated also what about mona lesa smileing thay said they needed that to discover if were smiling good to i think we can tell if someone is smiling and if someones isnt so yeah | 0 |
Having this type of technology can help people understand others emotions in many ways. It is obvious that this type of technology can not only help others understand students emotions, but possibly help the students who are feeling a certain way. I think that using this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in the classroom is valuable.
Having technology that can help show how a person is truly feeling is hepful in so many ways. For example, helping a person out who is feeling sad. A student in the classom is normally good at hiding their true emotions or how they are really feeling, but with this technology, a teacher could possibly help this student out once finding out that the student was upset or bothered with something either inside or outside of the classroom. Another way this technology is valuable is by being able to notice when a student is flustered or angry about not understanding a certain part of what they are learning. Not only can this technology determine one emotion, but can determain mixed emotions. This could help a lot when a student in the classroom may not fully understand a topic they are learning but say they understand it completly.
Having the chance to use this technology can help students further understand the subject they are on, because the teacher for sure recognizes that the student may not understand it. This also means teachers have more of the oppertunity to help their students out mentally. The use of this technology in classroms is very valubale for many obvious reasons. | 2 |
In the modern world, we are almost completely dependent on our technology to get us through the day. These human creations, such as, cellular phones, the internet, computers, and cars make it easier for us to perform everyday tasks. But for such heavy use of these items, there are side effects. Cars in particular can, and will, create lasting issues in our environment, which if not resolved will cause many problems in our future. But there is hope; if the First World states like the UK, France, Germany, and the U.S. were to cut down on car usage, we would see a drastic decline in not only the air polluting greenhouse gases, but also expenses for families spending all their money at a gas pump. Furthermore, we would see an increase in other things, such as the amount of exercise and public people would acquire through alternative transportation.
The foremost issue is of course, the environmental effects of cars. According to the New York times, cars are on average responsible for "12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe . . . and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas". These emissions can often make cities uninhabitable. In places such as Shanghai, Hong Kong, and other urban centers; heavy pollution requires citizens to wear gas masks, and acid rain devstates plant life. This heavy pollution has such an effect that it causes black snow in Russia, thousands of miles away. But the scale of the problem is much larger than acid rains and black snow; our planet is heating up, and greenhouse gases are to blame. If you want evidence just look at our neighbor, Venus. Roughly the size of Earth, scientists believe that Venus once has water, but look at it today, and you will see our solar system's hottest planet. Several million years ago Venus was overcome by volcanic activity; of much greater extent than anything ever seen on Earth since it's formation in pre-cambrian time. These volcanos spewed thousands of tons of carbon monoxide into the atmosphere, and thus began the greenhouse effect. The sun's rays would pierce through the smog and reflect off of the surface of the planet, but when they went back up the smog stopped them and turned them away, back down towards the planet's surface. This caused the planet to practically absorb all of the energy and heat of the sun. Before long the surface temperature became hot enough to melt lead, making Venus utterly uninhabitable. If nothing is done to stop atmospheric pollution, this is our future.
But in our modern world many people would be completely lost without a car, it has become the staple of our infastructure, not unlike the horse from years past. But there is evidence in the small town of Vauban, Germany; that life without cars is a very possible thing. The small community of Vauban has forbidden cars within their town, and the results are suprisingly positive. Of the residents of Vauban, seventy percent do not own cars, and are very happy with their circumstances. As Heidrun Walter said to the New York Times, "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." While other states might not have such successful car free zone's, Colombia has an annual car-free day in their capital of Bogota and surrounding cities. This day often has millions of Colombians biking, and walking from place to place. There has also been an improvement in city beautification according to an article by the Seattle Times, "Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city; uneven pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks . . . and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up." Not only does the restriction of cars help the environment, it can also help the economy.
The average American citizen's budget consists mainly of two things, housing, and vehicles. But during the recession of 2008, there was a decline of about nine percent in average miles driven. The burden of gas prices and car payments became too much for many unemployed Americans. But after the recession passed, the decline continued, and may soon accelerate. The New York Time states that "Demographic shifts in the driving population suggest that the trend may accelerate. There has been a large drop in the percentage of 16- to 39-year-olds getting a license, while older people are likely to retain their licenses as they age". If this trend continues, then we have already taken the first step in curbing our greenhouse gas emissions; and by doing so, we may increase the living standards of our citizens who would have more money. As well as repurposed government funding in other cleaner and faster forms of transportation due to a lesser need in road construction and maintainance.
Finally, the world we live in today is changing, and with always increasing technology, it may not be long before a clean alternative to gas burning vehicles arises. But you cannot count on the unknown; and what is known is that should we continue on our current path, the world will be a very hot place by 2040. Either we must change, or our cars will die with us. | 4 |
I do not belive that self driven cars are the are a good alternative, or that they would save lifes. They are not able to react to new or unforseen senarios, they would cause people to become comfortable and be unprepared in the case of a problem. People will overall become worse driverse and be more werried and more likely to panick in case of a siguation needing their atention manifesting it self. In adition a car is an item some people hold very closely and injoy driving, these people will likely resist driverless cars, making for an uncomfertable mix of the two. For these reasons it is my beleif that driverless cars are not the future and will in no way benifit society.
The driverless cars produced so far require humans to take over in siduations such as backing in and out of driveways, the visinity around ancidents, and unforseen complications. Right now these cars are only able to handle low speeds around 25 mph, and relly heavely on human intervention. Perhaps the greatest problem is the expence, the equitment is heavy expencive and likely requires constant revisions to the design as knew flaws are revealed, as well as constant repair. To add to that any accidents that do accore will can not be blamed on human error, so any manufactorer would have many additional expenses in court, not to mension how many laws must be changed in order to make any of this posible. Any human driver would have to remain alert at all time to make sore that the car is making no error, but seeing the miles go by any driver would be luld into a fake sence of confort and reliability.
In conclusion, through expences and through the impracticality of the entire concept this is an idea unlikely to make it to the market. People would blame any misshap on the unsentiant driver, and they would be very hard to rebuke which in adition to the manufactoring cost would make this undoable for most manufactering componies do to the cost alone. Laws woud need to change,people would become worse drivers, and would be unprepared for taking over. The most difficult parts of driving would be left for the humans. This idea is intreging but it is as many ideas are, impracticle, and very, very expensive. | 2 |
This is a natural landform on Mars. It may look like a human face, but we are for certian that this was not made from aliens. Many landforms are randomized and have different features.
The 'Face' has changed over the years. Like our planet's landforms, they are very random. Our mountains are different in everyway. So this 'face' is not created by ailens but is naturally created. No other lifeform has created this landform. It was discovered in 1976 and we have recent pictures of it in 2001. It has changed, but it could've been the erosion moving the rocks. Mars' weather is very different from ours. A team sent Mars Global Surveryor over Mars to take pictures of the Face, it was revealed that it is a natural landform and not a ailen monument.
This concludes my point. It has been revealed that there are no ailen markings or a monumet. The Face is just a natural landform and will be a natural landform. | 1 |
Have you ever gtten your hopes up for something special, but you secretly knew you wouldn't get what you wanted? That is how some felt once they discovered the "Face on Mars" wasn't actually a face. Many convincing facts led NASA's employees to believe this natural landform was actually a human face. However, there just so happened to be a few more facts and pieces of evidence to tell otherwise.
In September of 1997, Cydonia became NASA's number one priority when Mars Global Surveyor arrived to the Red Planet. The article says this was eighteen long years after the Vikings missions ended. Jim Garvin explaines how they felt this landform was important to taxpayers and they photographed the Face as soon as they could get a good shot at it. Beacause this mysterious form exsited and NASA payed so much attention to it, it shows that they only used solid facts to explain how this landform was created naturally and not by aliens.
It was not until Apri 5, 1998, a year after Cydonia became their priority, the Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, as stated in the article. It also says Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera team snapped a picture which was ten time sharper than the original Viking photos. This comes to show that NASA did not just go off one photo taken eighteen years before hand. Eager web surfers were anxious to find out something juicy, such as alien life form on Mars, but to their surprise the Face had occured naturally.
The web surfers and many other people were not satisfied with the outcome and were not going to give up on their hopes, but neither was NASA. The critics said how the "Face on Mars" is located 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was cloudy on Mars when the photo was taken. NASA then prepared to look again. Nevertheless, on April 8, 2001 Mars Global Surveyor drew in closer for a second time. Garvin stated, "We had to roll the spacecraft 25 degrees to center the Face in the field of veiw." The pixels in the most recent pictures taken spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixels in the best 1976 Viking photo. Garvin also adds how you can discern things in a digital image three times bigger than the pixel size. This means that it is the clearest image you could take and if there just so happened to be things such as airplanes on the ground, Egyptian-style pyramids, or even small shacks the picture could have clearly captured them.
Although many wanted to believe the Face was anything but a natural landform, NASA used strong facts and evidence to fight the arguement and convince people otherwise. I strongly believe The Face on Mars is natural and was not created otherwise because they used all facts and has three different pictures one of which could have spotted things other than the landform, but did not. Nothing but the truth was caught on camera and that is that the "Face on Mars" is nothing but a natural landform, and nothing more. | 3 |
Space is such an amazing and mysterious place. There are so many things we haven't explored in space, such as, Venus. The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" believes we should examine Venus despite the dangers that come with examining it. The reasons why author believes we should explore Venus even with all the dangers is because, Venus is the closest thing related to Earth, density and size wise, it seemed to have life on its surface in the past, making it elligible as another planet where other humans can live, and the last reason why the author thinks we should study Venus is just to get more information on a planet that is so fascinating and (occansionally) close to Earth.
Venus is so close to Earth that we are able to see it, occasionally. Its also close to Earth in terms of density and size. What if Venus could become more like Earth? Its roughly the same size, so we should study it more and support the spacecrafts being sent to Venus. The author supports the spacecrafts being sent to space because he includes in the article that,az "Because Venus is sometimes right around the corner-in space terms-humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world." Venus is so close we should explore it very closely, despite the risks.
Earth is where we live currently, but what if we could could live on Venus too? Venus has shown that, in the past, it had water and probably supported many forms of life. Earth is getting overpopulated, we need to find other places to live, Earth can only get so full. Currently, Venus has a very boiling hot surface, so no human could actually live there without the help of technology, but what if we could study the surface of Venus more to see if we can make Venus support life again. The author puts many ideas in the article that support humans on Venus, for example he puts the NASA idea of scientists making a "blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape.", to study Venus, up close.
The author understands the dangers of trying to research Venus up close. He mentions the dangers of how hot is is, "On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Farenheit", and how dense and thick it is, "A thick atomsphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus.", but he believes that Venus should still be explored, despite all these risks that could kill humans if they got too close and melt spacecrafts, which is a quite a lot of money lost. Venus is just so close sometimes, that it would be a let down to let it get so close and not explore it.
In conclusion, the author truly thinks that Venus should be explored even with all the risks invovled. The reasons why he believes this is because Venus is very closely related to Earth, physically, Venus has shown to have been able to support life in the past, making it another planet where humans can live, and the last reason is that Venus is so close (occasionally) so we should take that opportunity and make the most out of it. | 3 |
Luke (me) personaly wants people to join the Seagoing Cowboys Program. It is slot of fun you get to spend alot of time out on the ocean and the sights are absolutly magnificent. Every morning you get to wake up and breathe in the fresh ocean air and wake up to the sound of waves.
You should sign up and if you don't you will be missing out on alot of very neat experinces. And when you reach you destination you will be amazed at the wonderful sights. Not only that you get to tend to animals and help out. You also get to have a great feeling in your heart knowing you got to help.
As from the story you see how truly great it is to do this. Not interested yet well there is a chance when you are 18 years old you do not have to be drafted off to war,they may just have you do this. Now that you see that reason I bet I got your attention.
So when you do this not only do you get to have a great feeling in your heart knowing you helped, but you also get to see wonderful sights everywhere you look,and get to tend to soft fluffy animals that are so cute day in and day out,and who knows you may not even have to be drafted they may just have you do this only.
Come sign up today it will most certainly be the biggest chance of a lifetime. If you join today you will NOT be sorry, I will personaly gaurntee it. If you do not like it, join the war but when you sign up for the war I want you to think about how you could help tend to cute fluffy animals and see geat sights but its your choice. So come on what do you say, it will be a life changing experince for you. | 1 |
The idea of using facial recognition technology to identify how someone is feeling is a new one. It is also a preposturous one. You cannot fully understand what someone is feeling by looking at their face, and attempting to do so is an invasion of their privacy. Facial action coding systems should not be used in classrooms.
The idea that you could fully decipher what someone is feeling based on how they look is absurd. You cannot decide for yourself how someone feels based on the movement of their muscles. For example, if someone looks sad, you cannot just decide that they are sad, just because they look that way. If a machine decides I look confused, does it really have the right to change what I am learning? To understand how someone is really feeling, you have to first ask yourself why they might be feeling that way. Once you understand this, then you can determine what is happening. A machine cannot read minds. If I am confused about one thing, the machine does not know what. Not to mention that people often feel varying emotions at varying times of the day. I might be sad one minute, then laugh at a joke the next. I might not understand something, than understand it in the next second. The machine might automatically change something I understood based on a few seconds of confusion. This is not efficient or helpful.
To read someone's emotions based on their facial expressions is an invasion of their privacy. Let's assume this machine can accurately decipher someone's emotions based on muscle movement. What if you don't want people to know how you're feeling? If I am confused about something, and I am embarrased about it, suddenly the whole word knows. It should be up to the student to decide whether or not they want to seek help, not some magical machine. By forcing students to share private emotions, you run the risk of making them less willing to go to school. Who would want to go to a school where everyone knows how you feel at all times of the day? That would affect learning severely, and would definitely do more harm than good. Hindering learning in an attempt to better understand students is not worth it.
Using this software in classrooms would be ineffective, and even if it did work, it would be a huge invasion of privacy. This software should be used on paintings and nothing more. It is not accurate enough to do anything other than hold back human learning. This software is not fit for classrooms. | 3 |
More people today are driving less and using public transportation, walking, or riding a bike more. The main reason for this is because it benifits our environment. When people drive a car it releases gases into the air and breaks down our ozone layer that protects us from harmful rays from the sun. Limiting car use helps by decreaseing the gases into the air. People all over the world are helping prevent the usage of cars in many ways.
In Germany, people are moving to places that are "car-free" which is stated in the article
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars . It also says that "cars ownership is allowed, but there are only two places to park-Large garages...Where a car-owner buys a space, for 40,000, along with a home" (article 1 paragraph 2) This is trying to limit the usage of cars buy making it cost so much to park your car. Some people are saying that cars make them tense and by walking it makes them happier and more relaxed. They dont have to stress about putting gas in the car or driving safely. They are also trying to "make cities denser, and better for walking"(article 1 paragraph 6) Puting stores closer to areas with a higher population so people can walk to them helps. This is an advantage to people who live in car-free areas.
Paris is also taking part to help better our environment. They have "enfoced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city" according to the article
Paris Bans Driving Due to Smog . The city is being more forceful with this action by giving a fine of 22-euros ($31) to people who didnt leave their cars home on their day. Due to having these days banned from driving "congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France" (article 2 paragraph 14) By doing these two day France was no longer considered the most poluted city in the world, Beiging, China was the new holder of this name. People are now hopeing to get "plug-in cars, hybrids, and cars carrying three or more passengers" This will help bennifit the environment by decreasing the air pollution in the air.
BOGOTA, Colombia is making their move by having a car-free day where Colombians hiked, biked, skated, or took buses to work. " The goal is to promate altrenative transportation and reduce smog" according to the article
Car- free Day is Spinning into a Big Hit in Bogota . They want to show people there are several other ways to get somewhere without useing a car. A couple using a two-seat bicycle said it was a great way to take away stress and lower air pollution. Other cities in Colombia are also taking part in this event. Now the city of Bogota is making 118 miles of bike pathways for people to use daily. This day helps more people get outside and get active to. The article also states that " Parks and sport centers also have bloomed throughout the city" Having this day reduces the air pollution that was occuring and helps people relax.
To conclude, many citys are taking part in this act. They limited the car use and helped limit air pollution. People are starting to use cars less and take more alternative routes like walking or biking. Maybe you should try walking or riding a bike to work or school. You may like that more then driving and it helps the environment! | 3 |
The author talks about the dangers of exploring Venus, he also talks about much safer ways to explore the planet.
Paragraph 2 says," These differences in speed mean that sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus" This means that being able to determine where the spaceship is headed would be quite difficult considering the act that it may take a while to get there and the chances of Venus moving are pretty high.
Lastly the paragraph also states," Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survuved the landing for more than a few hours." The author says that Venus is the closest planet to being the most Earth-like because of its familir features, for example, Venus has valleys, mountains, and craters.
In Paragraph 3, it says not only are there "clouds of highly corrosive sufuric acid in Venus's atmosphere" but there's a thick atmosphere of about 97 % carbon dioxide "blankets" Venus. Paragraph 3 also states,"On the planets surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Farenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." At last, the passage states," also notable, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun."
All of this information is important to have in mind if NASA were to suggest we leave planet Earth to go to Venus for a planetary visit just so we know what to expect and be aware of the precautions we should take. | 1 |
The president of the United States should be decided by the Electoral College process, not by most popular vote. There are many reasons why we should keep the way we vote the same.
The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the president. Your state's entitled allotment of electors equals the number of members in it's Congressional delegation: one for each member in the house of Representatives and plus two for your senators. Each candidate running for president in your state has his or her own group of electors. When we vote this way, there's a certainty of outcome. A dispute over the outcome of an Electoral College is possible, it happened in 2000, but it's less likely than a dispute over the popular vote. The reason is that the winning candidate's share of the Electoral College invariably exceeds his share of the popular vote.
The winner-take-all method of awarding electoral votes induces the candidates to focus their campaign effforts on the toss-up states. Voters in toss-up states are more likely to pay close attention to the competing candidates, knowing that they are going to decide the election. The Ellectoral College restores some of the weight in the political balance that large states (by population) lose by virtue of the mal-apportionment of the senate decreed in the Constistution.
The Electoral College avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate receives a majority of votes cast, For example, Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992 both had only a 43 percent plurality of the popular votes, while winning a majority in the Electoral College. There is pressure for run-off elections when no candidate wins a majority of votes cast; that pressure, which would greatly complicate the presidential election process, is reduced by the Electoral College, which invariably produces a clear winner.
We definatly need to continue using the Electoral College process. The most popular vote process wouldn't be an ideal way to elect a president. | 0 |
Deer Senator:
They should keep the Electoral college, Because its where people vote to choose who's going to be the president and the vice president. If they have 538 electors they have to count them all not 270/538 because its not fair. I am Agree with the "Certificate of Ascertainment" they can have a certificate even if they did not won.
The State conventions, the presidential candidates, the state party's central committee they all should vote or choose at the same time. Voters get confused because the state convention, presidential candidates and the state central committee don't make up their minds....Why American people should considere themselves lucky if that was Back in 1960's, what makes them so sure that American people are going to be lucky again? well they might get lucky this time but not always they're going to be lucky every year its difficult and we are in 2015 now.
People should STOP thinking about what happen in the 1960's it might happen again okay but that was 45 years ago. Why A catastrophe? why cant they live in peace and stop hatting or whatever's going on.
If they keep doing that it might be a fight or a war between them, and we dont want any fights or wars this year. The electoral college have to change for good if they dont they wont see any votes when its time to vote..Segregationists they have to stop being rasists because people from all over the world are voting for them and they are all from different races.
. | 0 |
The main question is does FACS truely work? If so how does it work? Do you have proof that it works? How can a computer tell emotional expressions? If some people have trouble figureing out other people emotion then how can a computer find out. How long does it take to find the emotion. These are only a few questions I have to ask.
How does the software work? FACS the Facial actio coding system said that in the mona lisa picture that she was " 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful and 2 percent angry how do you know that you can't just look/scan a picture or a face and or a painting to find out if she is happy or not. Prof. Thomas Huang was the sciencest that was working on this prodject to get it working and truely work but He is haveing alot of problems about it haveing to fix bugs and better ways for the software to run smoother and faster. The man all behind this who thing is Dr. Paul Eckman, he is the creator of FACS.
I feel like this 'Software" wont last long. There is gonna be problems and bugs that your gonna have to sink alot of money into. You have to be willing to have more then one colleague helping BUT lets get down into it. The 'Software" dont need to be in classrooms its not valuable for example how are schools going to pay for it and how are we going to install and hook up all the right wires. What if the school is 3 stories high. How much is it to install and hook everything up. | 1 |
There has been a breakthrough in the science of emotion. The Facial Action Coding System or FACS, developed by Prof. Thomas Huang, is a new technology that can read and judge your emotions. Though this technology is outstanding, it is not practical for use in schools.
The machine is more than likely to expensive to have for each kid in a school. If the machine only cost $100 it would still take $200,000 to buy one machine for a high school that only has 2,000 students.
Another reason the machine is impractical is because of the fact that it is just simply not needed. Schools opperate perfectly fine without the machines today. Humans have learned to read emotions very well. One can tell when their friend is upset just by reading their body language. Schools do not need expensive machines to do what humans can already do. Instead of spending so much money on machines that do something humans already know how to do, schools could sped their money on other things that are needed like textbooks, paper, and other school supplies.
One could argue that the machines are very cool and should be put in schools to help teachers better understand how students are fealing, it is not needed in schools. It would not help get any kearning done in the classroom or make it easier for students to get through the lesson. Although Prof. Huang says that the machine could detect when a student was getting bored and changfe the lesson to get students more involed, it would mean that the lesson would not be the same for each student and they could learn something a little different from the rest of the class which could damage homework or test grades.
Though the FACS is very cool it is totally impractical. It is a machine that just replaces another thing that humans can alredy do. It is not woth the money for something that does what humans do for free. It would not help students learn anything any better than they already do either. As demonstrated through all of the reasons above, the FACS machine is not needed in schools. | 3 |
Driverless cars offer a glimpse of what we could have in the future.
Transportation as a whole would be greatly influenced by the introduction of autonomous navigation and driving systems for everyday use.
Driverless cars offer benefits that human-drivin cars simply cannot.
Machines are much less likely to commit errors than humans.
Autonomous cars can tackle many of our problems today, and are a promising technology that we must develop to better our lives and the world.
Through reduction of the threat of distracted driving, compensation for natural human errors when driving, and improvement of our public transportation system, Driverless cars can change our world for the better, and they offer a vast improvement on human-driven cars today.
Distracted driving is a major problem today that can be remedied through the use of driverless cars.
Today, a large percentage of automobile accidents in America occur due to a form of distracted driving.
However, self-driving cars can fix this.
When one is too intoxicated to drive themselves, or even too tired to drive properly, driverless cars eliminate the risk they pose to other users of the roadway by preventing them from driving with impaired judgment.
Machines can take over when the human driver isn't completely focused on the driving at hand and can correct major errors.
When it comes to texting, driverless cars are just as vital.
According to the article, some manufacturers want to bring heads-up displays with entertainment and information systems.
This would allow somebody to text while still having their eyes on the road.
Furthermore, they would be able to have the car drive for them while they were busy with their distractions.
Autonomous cars would prevent the many thousands of deaths each year that occur due to distracted driving.
Natural human errors are always present when driving, and autonomous cars can fix them before they become a problem.
Humans have a slow reaction time compared to machines, or make rash decisions.
If a human-driver were trying to parallel park, it would be very hard to get a full understanding of the situation without automated driving.
According to the article, GM has created seats that rumble when the vehicle is about to back into an object.
This helps remove any errors from driving since a driver who didn't have an self-driving car would not know that there was an object to the rear and would then commit a major error.
Machines can process information much faster as well, so if human reaction time is too slow, machines can take over to stop a car, or prevent it from harming anyone.
Humans are error-prone creatures, but driving can be error-free through the use of driverless cars.
Autonomous cars can improve our public transportation system and allow for easier transport anywhere.
According to the article, Sergey Brin, the cofounder of Google (now Alphabet), believes that fleets of public-transport driverless taxis would be able to reduce fuel consumption and be more flexible than existing systems.
This is important because public transportation is very inefficient today.
Often, cities don't have underground subways, and must rely on buses to get around.
Buses are highly inefficient because they have set routes and are inflexible.
Driverless taxis could be ordered to pick up passengers at a certain location and drop them off at another.
This is much more convenient and efficient for consumers since they don't have to do much walking while trying to look for a bus stop.
Driverless taxis would also allow for long-distance public transportation.
Today, trains have the same problem of buses in that they have set routes and they are hardly funded.
With public-transportation driverless taxis, customers can travel long distances and reach destinations in a much more convenient and efficient way than current transportation systems allow.
Public transportation would be greatly improved through the introduction of driverless cars.
Driverless cars offer a variety of benefits including improvement of our current public transportation system, accounting for and reducing human error on the roadways, and eliminating the risk of distracted driving affecting other roadway users.
Human driving today is an inefficient and dangerous task that can be better performed by machines.
Automation can be more precise than humans ever can, and it is only natural to apply this to driving.
Automated driving can improve all of our lives only if we make progress in developing the technologies to better our future. | 2 |
If the face was created by aliens then their would be a civilization on the planet long before. Even if that could be really thrilling that ,however, is not true. The Face that is on Mars is a mesa because reaserch and pictures where analized, it matches to our natural landforms, and their are multipule in Cydonia. Each of these prove that it is not made by aliens, as cool as that would be. If we go more into depth we will talk about the pictures and research, our landforms, and the multipule in Cydonia.
First off, The face on Mars is a mesa ,thanks to the pictures that where analized. It could also pose as a butte like the one in Snake River Plain of Idaho. The text states that, "What each picture actually shows is the martian equivalent to a mesa or buttle." (12) It just shows how much just one picture can prove.
Second, This looks like just another one of our landforms. Like I had said before it is like the Middle butte in Snake River Plain. In the text it states that , "Thousands of web surfers waiting when the image was revealed on the JPL wedsite, appearing... a natural landform." (7) If thousands of people had saw a landform appear how do you not see that it is like the ones on Earth.
Finally, in Cydonia their are already multiple mesas. The only difference is that this one is more face like. The articale says, " It was just another Martian mesa, common aruond Cydonia, only this one had unusual shadows around it."(2) If NASA had done research to see about other laandforms and they have proven that their are more than one on the plane, then it must be true.
Most people say, "The face is bona fide evidence on Mars-- evidence that NASA would rather hide." (5) However why would NASA want to ruin their entire budget by saying that their was a civilization on Mars to begin with. So these three points, landforms, pictures, and the multiple mesas, should show that The Face really is not a martian creation. | 3 |
Unmasking the Face on Mars is a mystery that is still to be solved. Me as a NASA scientist, I have many pieces evidence to prove that this mysterious face landform was just caused by craters or natural weathring straking the red planet. My evidence will prove a person who believes in aliens creating this face incorrect.
To prove that aliens didn't have any effect on Mars, many natural landforms we have on earth can predict and support that this face was naturally occuring. These images in 1976, 1998, and 2001 remind scientists of the landforms on Earth such as a butte or mesa. To prove this, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) caught images of the face on camera. It was clear it was just a regular landform, not a special, purposefully made alien monument.
The technology we have today makes it clear that the face was just made by natural causes. Our cameras have a clear shot and bigger pixel size digital image. They would have seen any other objects located around the landform like airplanes or pyramids that people believe were made by aliens. There weren't any! The landform looks like a face in ways but it's easy to tell it was made by incoming asteroids on the landscape of the planet. The light from the sun and the shadowing just makes the landform look as if it had eyes, nose, and a mouth.
This evidence given proves a person who believes that aliens created this mysterious face on the red planet wrong. Through the process of unmasking the face, it is clear that natural disasters and weathering happened to create a resemblance of this structure. Unmasking the Face on Mars is still a mystery to be solved for years to come. | 2 |
In the sky late at night there is alway one star really bright. That one bright light is Venus the 2nd planet it is very close to the sun. The planet Venus has 97% dioxide blanks and the clouds are highly corrosive and have acid in them so like those are really bad and can really harm the human skin. Venus get up over 800 degrees i cant belive it would be that hot up on Venus jus becuase it's i think it relly close too the moon. The studies are really good and spacific I learned new things about Venus such as it is the hottest planet of all planets and our solar system. The suface of Venus it very rocky and has mountains, vallys and craters.
On the planet Venus It is very dangorus to go to the planet without any gear or equipment like NASA. Venus has no life on the planet i dont think nothing could handle the heat of that planet it has 97% carbon dioxide blankets, and the numbers of Venus are all high so that isnt very good to be in a place like that. The cloulds are also acid so it would be really hard to find cover or to grow food or any source. There is a temperature over 800 that is just crazy too think about like how could there be a planet over 800 deggres. The conditions of Venus is just very cridical for anything to be on that planet. Venus is the closest to the sun so i think that explains how the weeather is so hot and the acid from the clouds make it worse then it all ready is in my opinion. Researchers have a ship that orbits the planet Venus and hovors safely and they research the planet but they cant take any rock, gas or anthings from a distance.
So the planet Venus will still be in space and it is an incredible planet to really think about and how everythings works about it. It is very diffrent then earth, I wondering if atleast somethigs lives on the planet Venus and if there is how does it keep it self safr and find food. The astronauts that go to the planet Venus to see what is happening up there and wear the gear they need to survive. They research the as most as they can to see if the planet is good enough or if it isn't. This would be a great story if the planet Venus would be able to be live up there with any dangers but it is to dangorus to be up there. | 0 |
Wouldn't it be amazing to travel around the world country to country and being able to see beautiful sights of their landmarks? Well if you're getting interested keep reading because part of being in the Seagoing Cowboys program has many contrasts on the sights you'll see now and other places that you've never seen! Participating in this oppertunity has many advantages maybe on what you'd like to be when you are a grown adult.
To begin with, the sights if you choose to join will be marvelously outstanding in the distance and upclose. And you may get a benefit from helping people in need of your help and seeing the countries of Europe and China! Once you get to Greece it's breath taking if you get to the part of Greece named Acropolis. There is also an excavated castle in Crete annd marveled at the Panama Canal as you head to the country of China.
Secondly,traveling the high seas when your on board on a boat it can be somewhat fun. The cowboys play baseball and a little of volleyball to keep their minds bussy. This also includes table tennis tournaments, fencing and boxing, reading, whittling, as for games had also helped the time pass by.
In addition, this opportunity shall make you more aware of your surroundings. For example, the people that have their needs but maybe they don't have food or water to drink and knowing you did something good makes you feel good about yourself. Not only in your country but in other countries and their troubles that you may not think about or outside of your state. Just thinking about how many people out there in the world no matter rich or not they all need our help at times.
Lastly, once again the Seagoing Cowboys program can be a big influence in your life and the way you treat and think of others. Just image the way people around the world need money,clothing, and shelter. Knowing you made a difference little or big no matter what size of goodness changes the way you live and the way others live as well. Many people have done this and their reviews are pleasuring to read/hear because it opened up a whole new world for them that they never known of that has just been rediscovered! | 4 |
¨The Face of Mars¨
The ¨Face¨ on Mars is not an actually face at all. If there were life on Mars, this life definitally wouldn´t be enormous as it say in the artical ¨Unmasking the Face on Mars¨ in paragraph one. It states, ¨An enormous head nearly two miles from end to end seemed to be staring back at the cameras from a region of the Red Planet called Cydonia.¨. Another reason why the face isn´t life on mars it that in paragraph twelve Gravin talks about how this face remind him of similar landforms back on Earth. Garvin also says how there are common landforms around the American West, so if there was life on Mars why would there be simlar landmarks on Earth? The staement Garvin say is that ¨It reminds me of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho,¨ Garvin also mentions that the landform in Idaho is the a lava dome that takes form of an isolated mesa about the same size as the Face on Mars.
In conclusion, The Face on Mars isn´t any type of life or aliens because there are similar landforms in the American West of the U.S. like the lava dome in Idaho that Garvin says is similar in size and it looks the same. Another quote in this article is ¨An enormous head nearly two miles from end to end seemed to be looking at back at the cameras.¨ now if there was to be life on Mars, the life would not be enormous I can tell you that. | 1 |
Technology is the future, and with the advancement of technology comes the addition of responsibility for the people using it. One hundred and fifty years ago, we had a thriving textile industry, and the long awaited introduction of railroads and canals. Today, we are advancing with the hopes of creating a cost efficient self-driving vehicle that people from all reaches of the world can use. While this task may prove to be difficult, it is definitely a task that we should take on. Self-driving cars are a beneficial gateway to mastering concepts like artificial intelligence. Continuous experimentation with self-driving, or driverless cars will only prove to be benefical to humanity. I believe that the development of driverless cars will make driving safer, create opportunities in transportation, and lead on to greater advancments in technology.
Think of a world where technology is what gets people from one location to another. One would get in their vehicle, speak or type in a few commands, and be on the way to their desired location. If scientists can master driverless cars, the road would be a much safer place. Driverless cars would make many less mistakes than the average human being. With the use of the advanced sensors, GPS, and radars that have been developed, cars will be able to communicate with one another and make decisions faster than any human. Every vehicle will be on a network communicating with one another, allowing for the safest and most efficient driving. The mental and physical aspects of humans play a huge role in driving conditions. A human's driving capabilities are hindered by mental and physical feelings like anger or fatigue. These feelings do not have an effect on driverless cars. Driverless cars can only make the road a safer and more efficient place, as they are able to communicate with one another and eliminate common human mistakes.
Driverless cars are a stepping stone for greater transportation. With the developments of these technologies, improvements will be made in all aspects of transportation. Bus travel will become safer and more efficient. When this technology hits the world of aviation, planes and other aircraft will go beyond what they are today. Flying already uses extremely advanced technologies, but scientists can definitely push it to be better. When a well-made driverless car is developed, doors are opened for all types of transportation. Driverless cars will not only revolutionize all aspects of transportation, but it will also open doors in other areas of technology.
With the advancement of driverless cars, comes the eventual advancement of other technologies. The investment in the development of driverless cars will yield a great reward. Scientists will be able to push the boundaries of artificial intelligence, which plays a huge role in driverless cars. Artificial intelligence pushes for a greater future, as it allows for robots and alike technologies to complete tasks that would be difficult or time consuming for humans. Radars and sensors will also improve. People see radar technology in the weather, and GPS systems. With the advancements of radar technology, there will be a day when scientists can detect a tornado hours before it is going to touch down. At that point in time, there may even be technology to stop natural disasters.
In conclusion, driverless cars will take time to perfect, but driverless cars will be worth it when this perfection comes. There is a plethera of advantages that driverless cars bring to the table. They make the driving world a safer, and more efficient place. The technologies used in driverless cars also open doors to new types of technology. The benefits heavily outweigh the consequences when it comes to the development of driverless cars. When the world wanted to reach the stars, we did, so now let us reach for a technology that will make the world a better place. | 4 |
I believe the author article can be supported with his/her study and details. In my option I think that trying to explore further into the idea of entering Venus's atmosphere might be dangerous; however, it could lead to a whole new story and new exploration. Taking the time to figure a way to land on Venus safely will take time, the technology and spaceship that would be used to enter Venus atmosphere will need to be excellant, and it might take risk on peoples lives trying to enter and explore a whole new planet.
Scientist often referr Earth's "Twin" as Venus because it is the closest plalnet to Earth in terms of density and size, quoted in paragraph 2. If Venus is very similar to Earth, it could mean that life could live on Venus such as how life lives on Earth to this day. "Long ago, Venus was probably cover largely wit oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth" (Paragraph 4). This shows that scientist have perdicted theories over Venus and are still currently trying to solve and prove their theory. Finding a way to get to Venus is the problem we have here on Earth. In the text it states "Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours" (paragraph 2). This shows that Venus is very different than the Planet we live on and it will take time to create a space shuttle that is well fit to enter Venus's atmospere.
The technology and spaceshuttles have not been made or designed to enter an atmosphere so powerful yet. "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus" (paragraph 3). The information that scientists are finding on Venus is amazing and will help other scientist find ways to design a spaceshuttle to get through the blanket of Venus. Venus has a very hot surface level of 90 times greater than the surface level than the Earth. We need to discover a way to allow our spaceships to under go the high pressure that it would have to go through to enter Venus.
NASA has one issue that they struggle on besides buildling the spaceships that they would want to send to Venus. That struggle is sending a human to Venus, and not knowing what will happen on the trip there. Is it worth risking a life to explore or not sending anyone and forget about this whole experiment? If I had to pick, my answer would be Yes. I believe that finding a new Planet that life could live on just like Earth could continue the species of mankind. No man has under gone more pressure than the Earth's atmosphere, and Venus atmosphere could destroy anything that we create that enters its atmosphere including a human if we sent them.
In conclusin, I believe it is worth continuing to study and figure a way to have a spaceshuttle land in the planet of Venus. Eventually when it is safe and we have solved how to create a safe space shuttle that a human can survive and enter Venus. Being able to explore Venus and find ways to live on the planet could start a new way of life for mankind. | 3 |
The idea of driverless cars is extraordinary and could be a great plan and a great source of entertainment. Who would not want a car that drives by itself? The idea is great but it could potentially bring a lot of bad baggage along with it. The world does not need driverless cars because it is unsafe, defeats the purpose of driving, and is a waste of money.
Driverless cars are very unsafe. In the article it talks about all the things they can do, for example, it can steer, accelerate, and brake all by itself! Somehow, someway this is possible, but is it consistent is the question? Throughout the article they talked about tests they did and the results that came with the tests. While describing them the author used phrases like, "It worked well." Only one paragraph in the article they were 'for sure' that it worked. For someone to drive such a car they should have specific clarification that they would be safe while inside this vehicle, and they can trust that they have no worries and that this car will do 80% of the work for them. Also, if the car does most of the work for you, then what is the point of having a car?
Driverless cars defeat the purpose of even having a car. All of the processes you go through as a teenager with getting your permit or license is diminished, and in a sense you did all that work for nothing. The point of driving is having a quicker way of getting to the places you need to be instead of walking, biking, etc. In paragraph 10 it says that an automaking company named 'Tesla' is making a car that can be on autopilot 90 percent of the time. Ask youself, why would you waste your time on getting a car like that when you can ride the bus, train, limo, or taxi that would do 100 percent of the driving for you? That would just make me feel like I'm wasting my money on senseless things.
Driverless cars are also a waste of money. Automakers spend millions, maybe even billions of dollars making prototypes of these cars and testing them. Every time one of the test cars do not work they have to go and make a new one which is money that could be used for something a lot more efficient. The automakers to this day are still doing this, which is throwing money out the window. But not just the automakers are wasting their time and money, if people were to get this car they would be wasting their time and money also. People would waste thousands of dollar on one car that is pointless. Rich or poor this would be a senseless investment, because there are cheaper ways to get where you need to go. Taxi's, limos, buses, and trains are all great affordable ways of transportation. The automakers could find something that is a lot better and cheaper that could change the world.
Driverless cars is again a wonderful, awesome idea. It would definetly have a lot of popularity and publicity but is it really worth it in the long run? The automakers can find a lot of things that could change the world, and this is something the world does not need. The world should not have driverless cars because it is unsafe, defeats the purpose of driving, and is a waste of money. | 3 |
The Face is a natural landform and was not created by aliens. First of all why would NASA hide something like that from us? Second of all the Mars has not shown signs of life form, it has been vacient for as long as we know. Though it has been in moves, books, magazines, radio talk shows, and more for more than 25 years, don't beleve everything you here or see in a movie it's not factual.
NASA couldn't/wouldn't hide something like aliens from us. They have all of the facts they need to determen that this was not done by aliens. They have done reaserch and test to determan that its not done by aliens. Aliens are just mithical creatures.
Mars has been empty for as long as we have been able to go to Mars. It is just the rock formation and the shadow giving it the affect of looking like a face. The pictures show it was just rocks. The first one 43 meters per pixel compared to the new image that spans 1.56 meters both show the same thing.
The Face has been in moves, books, magazines, radio talk shows, and more for more than 25 years! Do you beleve in every move you watch,every magazine you read, or how about every talk show you listen to. Unless you do you probly dont beleve in this alien nosnese you beleve in reaserch and facts. NASA has come up with these facts to prove its not created by aliens.
The Face created by an alien is just a conspiracy theory. It is shaped like a face but it is the shadows that make us beleve it looks like a face. Do you think some how that aliens have made it so the shadows are alaways there so it always looks like a face.
Mars has as many aliens as we do here on earth. Secrets and lies all come out eventualy. Here on earth there is life formes but not on mars. This face has been everywhere but so has celebrties are you going the beleve everythig you here about them. This is all just a conspiracy theory and conspiracy theorys corupt. | 3 |
Using the Facial Action Coding Sytem is a great idea to have in a classroom. When a teacher is teaching sometimes kids don't understand what they are teaching about, but if they have an asasignment on the computer and they use the system it will help a lot of teachers out. If the student gets confused on a problem and the computer can read that they are confused and it notifys the teacher the teacher can go over and help the student.
In the classroom there are some students who don't like speaking out or ask questions because they are shy or don't feel smart because they have to ask questions but in this way they won't have to deal with any of that because the computer reads that they are having trouble. In the article it says that Dr. Huang could read how Mona Lisa was feeling just by a computer telling him. This system could also be a way to teach kids how to read how people are really feeling because in today's world no one can fully read how people are feeling.
In paragraph 6 Dr. Huang says " most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication, so computers need to understand that too" computers should understand that so they can read how people are feeling to make things easier. The computers in todays society hare very good technology but i think this would make it better. In most schools nowadays the students already have lap tops so this would be a great idea.
All schools should have this system. This system will help out students dramaticly. This system wont make them get out of there comfort zone to ask a teacher for help instead the teacher will come to them. | 2 |
Everyone's talking about traveling and studying about planets in our Solar System like Mars,Pluto,Mercury,Saturn,and Jupitar to study their wonders.But traveling and studying about Venus is one not heard being often. That's because Venus has a reputation of being a challenging planet for humans to study due to the dangers it presents.
The author stated that scientists studying Venus and it's surface said it's worthy pursuit because astronomers are also fascinated by the sister planet because it may once been a Earth-like planet a long time ago. "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been most Earth-like planet in our solar system".
The text stated that before Earth, Venus may have had life on the planet million of years ago.
The author also gave examples of the planets' surface that are analogous to Earth such as landforms,types of rock sediment,and land features. "The planet of Venus has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familar features such as valleys,mountains,and craters". The quote stated that Venus has similar chracteristics to that of Earth with landforms and rock sediments.
Last thing the author gave in the article is that scientists that want to do a mission on Venus to collect any evidence has to be close and personal and not from a distance. "Researchers cannot take samples of rock,gas,or anything else,from a distance.Therefore,scientists seeking to conduct a thorough mission to understand Venus would need to get up close and personal despite the risk". It was stated that by understanding Venus more, scientists will have to conduct a mission that is close and personal to gather up samples of Venus to study it more than by distance.
Traveling and studying to Venus is another goal wanted by astronomers and scientists to discover its secrets to see if there was any life on the planet. However, the "sister planet" presents dangers such as being covered by carbon dioxide,clouds filled with sulfuric acid in the atmosphere,800 degree Fahrenheit temperatures, and atmospheric pressure 90 times greater than Earth. But despite of the dangers that Venus lays ahead of us, Scientists are eager to learn about the planet due to having similarities to Earth millions of years ago, having landforms and rock sediments,and wanting to collect samples of rock,gas,and anything else for scientists to learn is what is driving scientists more eager to study and travel to Venus. | 1 |
Few Nasa scientists believe that the face on Mars was created by aliens. To be scientifically correct, the face is actually just a huge rock formation which are commonly found on Earth. There is no evidence supporting the clame that aliens created that landform on Mars.
Scientists have proved that the face on Mars was created by a huge rock formation. The image taken on Mars in 1998 revealed that the face is really just a natural landform. Therefore, there was no alien monument after all. Perhaps people wanted to think the face on Mars was created by aliens just so it couold be a good story for a magazine or Hollywood film, but that is not true. Scientists have revealed how the landfrom is equivalent to a butte or a mesa, which are commonly found on Earth.
With the evidence provided from scientists, the claim that aliens made the face on Mars has been proved incorrect. There is no evidence that prove that the landfrom has been created by aliens. In conclusion, aliens did not make the landform on Mars. | 2 |
When someone hears the word Venus, they don't think as it as a planet, but it is a planet. It is the second planet from the sun. Venus could led us to an equal intimidating endeavors.
In paragraph 4, it says that Venus may once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Venus had oceans and life on it like earth does now. It had moutains, valleys, and craters. Now no space craft can survive the landing for more than a few hours, like paragraph 2 says.
In paragraph 5, it says that they might send people to Vensus, but in a safe way. The NASA'S possible solution for it to be safe from the surface is to make them float above the fray. It won't be easy it says in paragraph 5, but it will be a challenge and survivable for humans.
Hoving over the planet can provide limited insight on ground conditions, as it says in paragraph 6. Most light cannot penetrate the dense atmossphere, rendering stanard forms of photography and videography ineffective. They can't take things from distance. In paragraph 6 it says that researchers are working on allowing mechines to last longer to get the meaning knowledge of Venus.
Venus is a planet, but visting it could be dangerous in some cases. Trying to land on Venus and surviving will be a challenge for the people, but they can figure it out so they will survive. | 2 |
The topic of the story is about venus and about exploring venus because, in the reading it is giving information on the distance frome the earth and how chalenging and interesting it is for venus to be examined. I got this frome the info frome the first paragraph sentence 3. Venus is also is the second planet frome the sun which is in paragraph 1 sentence 2. I can aonclude that venus is a pretty enteressting planet to try to explore.
I think that the author think's that venus is also an interesting planet to study because of the chalenging planet's flaw's I can conclude this because in paragraph 2 sentence 4 the reading states that since no space craft survived the landing for more than a few hours and that it also states that in the 2nd paragraph it states that the reputation of the planet is chalenging do to the proximity.
I believe that most of the reason that venus is to be considered chalenging. Is because of the thick atmosphere and the temprature on the planet I found this information frome p3 sentence 1 throgh 3 and it states that almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blanket's and that the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid's in the planet's atmosphere on venuse's atmosphere and that the temprature average over 800 degrees fahrenhight and that the pressure being over 90 time's greater they experienced.
The planet venus have some comeparenson's to the planet earth that what make planet venus worthy to explore like having feature's like valley's,mountain'sand crater's just like earth. I got this information frome p4 sentence 3-4 which I think why the author also think that venus would be worth studying and how interesting it would be if they could try to actualy atemtp land on venus.
I think that venus would be a cool place to study because having access to better material that it can make NASA landing on venus easier and make the landing safer than before with also knew technology. I would also think that the author would be able to expireince wha venus is like and that it would be an adventure to explore venus and to discover knew thing's on the planet. | 1 |
Dear Florida Senator,
I think we should change our voting system to a popular vote instead of an electoral college. I think this should change because the electoral college has many flaws in it with the way it is done. The popular vote is much more reasonable and practical.
One of the main reasons that I believe we should switch is because of the "Disaster Factor". I think that this really stood out to me when reasearching. According to source two,"The American people should consider themsleves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century; the system allows for much worse." The author is one-hundred percent correct. The state legeslatures are responsible for picking electors, and the electors can ALWAYS deny the will of the people. This would not happen with popular vote because the people's opinion translates directly to who they want as president.
Another reason why the popular vote is the better way to go is because you will never get a tie. With the electoral votes, a tie is possible becuase there is an even number of electoral votes across the United States. Also, not one citizen of the Unoted States wants a draw because then the House of Representatives would have power and state delegations would vote for the president. The houses decision will almost certainly not reflect the real coice of he people.
My last reason why I believe that the electoral college is unfair to voters is because the swing state votes. If its a tight race all the way to the end and theres only a few states that need to make a final decision, sometimes a small state ultimatly changes the end result of the precidency. With the popular vote, this would never happen. The electoral college basically says that some states are more important then others by giving them more say in who is president. Popular vote counts every single person as one.
So after reading my letter I hope you have come come to the conclusion that popular vote is by far better. Electoral College is just old school, not fair, and can cause stupid issues that can easily be avoided with Popular vote. Popular vote will never tie, let others choose who is president besides the people, and would never let a swing state change the destiny of the United States of America.
Sincerely,
Timothy Eustace | 3 |
What comes to mind when you hear the phrase, driveless cars? Does this phrase bring fear and discomfort or confidence and curiousity to mind? There is a phrase that goes as follows, curiousity killed the cat, and I believe that our curiousity will provide fatal outcomes in the future with so called, driveless cars. The author of the article "Driveless Cars Are Coming." provides some key points on why driveless cars may never be completly driveless and some problems they might provide as well, for example the author states about how in some situations human skill may be required, as well as how the law doesn't fully approve of so called driveless cars and even if it did many laws would have to be placed just in case there may be some faults in the technology and etc.
One problem with the so called driveless cars is the fact that human skill may be required in certain situations. For example, the author talks about how in certain situations such as traffic jams, work sites, and around accidents human skill may be required. If human skill may be needed then the purpose of driveless cars is defeated. What would be the point of having a driveless car if you just had to sit there and wait for your turn to drive the car out of a challenging situation. That doesn't sound very driveless to me.
Another problem driveless cars impose invlolves the law. For example the article states that most driving laws focus on keeping everyone safe, and they all agree the best way to do that is to have alert drivers at the wheel. Many laws would have to be put into place to even allow the full use of so called, driveless cars. How would a driveless car react to a regular automobile passing them on a highway? Even if driveless cars did become legal and functional not everyone would be running to buy them. As well, whose fault would it be if the technology some how fails? Technology doesn't always work, and with lives being at immediate risk of a technological fail and more, the chances of the law allowing it seems very low.
To conclude, driveless cars would not be safe and or even driveless. The need for an active and alert driver in a driveless car would defeat the purpose. As well, the law and it's laws would have to change a lot to provide the safest way of travel using the so called, driveless cars. Sure it sounds like a good idea on paper, but in reality I believe that it just wouldn't work or even be driveless at all. | 2 |
I believe that use of the Facial Action Coding System could make immediate impacts in a classroom setting. The idea of being able to see someone's inner emotions could show lots of value for teachers in the class. This machine, after being tested in the classroom, could be used to make even more accurate and in-depth machines that could go even deeper. All it takes is it starting off.
There are many benefits to having a machine that is able to accurately find someone's emotions. The applications in the classroom would help make the day for a teacher run smoothly if there was trouble with a student, or if there was something upsetting a student you could use this device. The value of knowing what your students feel could help mold a curriculum that would be the most effective for their learning. Paragraph 6 mentions that classes could have computers that could detect these emotions, and change the way the lesson is and mold it to work for that specific student.
There is no reason that the FACS shouldn't be implemented into classes. The FACS is just a more accurate way of processing and recognizing someone's emotions and feelings. We, as humans, are always performing this calculation every day, as listed in paragraph 5. We cannot tell every emotion in someone's face, as they could be hiding their emotions behind a fake smile, or hiding sorrow or sadness behind a snarl. With the FACS knowing the emotions of a student in class who is struggling could maybe help the student and teacher find a way to stop the struggle. There is nothing wrong with knowing a student's emotions so a teacher can assist them if they are struggling.
This understanding of emotions and the creation of lessons that could help with those emotions could help graduation rates for schools go up, and help the GPA or work ethic of a student to increase. These benefits all could come from knowing students' emotions as long as the FACS is put into a school's classrooms.
Some may be worried that the FACS could be unaccurate and tell wrong emotions, but claims in paragragh 3 state that muscles in your face also dictate what emotion your feeling. These muscles can also indicate whether your smile is real and you are really happy, or if your smile is fake and that your feeling something different. Trained psychologists and others in their respected fields have contributed to the FACS to try and help create accurate assumptions based on the muscle usage in a person's face.
The evolution and effectiveness of the FACS could increase with the help of its use in the classroom, and the readings could become more accurate and more beneficial to the teacher and the student. The FACS could be used in almost anywhere, but I believe that it would have the biggest impact in the classroom. The effect it could have enourmous, and all it would take is one computer software.
The FACS should be put in classroom, not only to further the research needed to help develop the software more, but to help students who may struggle with lessons in class. The FACS's ability to read emotion will benefit student and teacher when the time comes, all it needs is to find its place in the classroom. | 4 |
Cars, a right and a way of transportation that we as people of the untired states have, used by many as a source of going from point a to point b. But if while going to those places you relized you where just killing the earth every mile at a time. Cars give off gas that pollutes the air and harms us, and begins to create green house gases. Over time these gases could do very harmful things to us. The soulution isnt as simple as everyone in the world giving up there car, But what if there is a long term soultion to fix this big problem.
In Vauban, Germany residents of this
Upper class community have given up cars in a experimental test to see the results of giving up cars to see others ways people could do about getting place to place and helping stop green house gases along the way. The results of doing this could mean that other countries, towns and cities may want to try this as well. In the town people make there way around by transportation such as bikes, running and walking. With this in mine you may be thinking what is I want to go the mall and its down a highway? Easy if the plan did happen things like malls, stores, food markets would be down the street so you can still enjoy the things you love but not have to spend money on gas and car payments anymore.
Paris bans driving due to smog, After 2 days of record breaking pollution paris put into effect a new rule that would clear up there city. On a Monday all cars where to not be on roads and stayed parked. With the option to leave your car at home or pay a fine of 22 euro's, 4000 drivers were fined and 27 got there car towed away. With smog polluting the air tempertures and weather changes begin to happen with cold night and warm days car emissons where trapped by warmer air. The act was a success and most pollution in the city was gone so by tuesday everyone could return back to driving.
In Bogota, Columbia Only buses and traxis where permitted fir the Day with a population of 7 million, the whole thing was a huge success and there was a huge turnout. The purpose of this was athe goal to promote alternative transpotation and reduce smog. Millions of colombians biked, skated hiked and took buses during the car free day leaving traffic jams and easing stress to many people. Authorties came to Bogota to see the event and not only where they enthusiastic but with them liking how the even happened it means they could do it for there city making a chain recation to more and more till all people would like to participate in this oppurtunity to help save the earth. This event was not a tragicic loss of not being able to drive it was just showing that there are other means of transportation and not driving your car can help you in many ways.
So with these efforts of showing it dosent hurt to try something and it can be a train reaction to starting something big to end green houses gases that people all over give to the earth on a daily baisis. This just shows that cities like ours could try things like this and maybe help start something that can have sucha huge impact on our lives. With this maybe peopl ewill start to relize tha tcars arent all a big thing, and maybe the peak could come to a end and people could start somehting new. With car purchases and miles on car dropping the way to old ways of transposrtation can resurface as main ways to get to places. This can help our states because in the whole world 50 percent of polution comes from the United States. This can be a problem because if we want to see changei n out world we need to start off small to get to the end of green house gases. | 2 |
To whom it may concern,
The growing debate on whether or not the electorial college is necessary for when the country is voting for it's president. I am writing to argue that the electorial college is vitial to the presidential election process becuase it evens out the importance of all the states' votes, gives us a certainty of an outcome, and allows for toss-up states to vote for the best candiate.(Posner) It can be precieved that the electorial college is a non-democratic way of voting for the president. Although it may be seen like that, it is in fact favorable towards the people becuase the electors that you indirectly vote for are voting for the same candidate as you were. The electorial college has been around for decaades and has very few times caused a disruption in our country. Why should we eliminate a process that has worked for years and will continue to work for years to come?
The electorial college should be kept becuase it allows for the smaller states to compete against the larger states in terms of votes for the presidency. A state like California has a larger population than Alaska so in turn they would have more voters. The electorial college evens out the number of people per state that votes so the candidiate chosen is truly who the country wants as the president. A larger state would also get more attention than a smaller state due to it's size difference. Smaller states would get discouraged and soo only the larger and more populated areas would vote becuase they are getting the most attention from the candidates themselves.(Posner) Our country is made up of fifty states and all of them should have an equal imput in who runs our counrty.
Many of the time voters will vote becuase they want to have their party in the president's seat. There are some states that are called swing states that will vote for the president that they beileve will have the best impact on our country reguardless of thei party preference. The electorial college lets the voters from these toss up states vote for the best candidate becuase they are more likely to make thought out decisions because they listen to the candidates proposal and not their party.(Posner) With this in mind, that means that in the end the president chosen is thought to be truly the best winner for the presidency because the toss-up staes chose them over the other.
A dispute is possible when the outcome of the president's election is presented. However, it is likely that a dispute will happen if popular vote were to be the process of electing our president. There is very little chances that the electorial college will have a tie and there is the realisation that if popular voting were to happen, there would be more tied elections happenning. The country wants to have certainty when voting for their president and having the electorial college allows for every state to have a definite candidate and in turn the country can have a definite president by the end of the elections.
The electorial college is vitial when chosing the presdient becuase it gives us certainty in an outcome, evens out the importance of states votes, and gives swinger states an equal vote as well. We need to keep the electorial college and should it be eliminated, it could put our presidential elections at risk. For decades, the electorial college has worked and our founding fathers believed it was necessary. I implore to you thatkeeping the electorial college is the best for the president's elections.
Sincerely,
A concerned citizen | 4 |
Have you ever heard of the process of electoral college? As stated in paragraph two of the article source one ''does the electoral college work?'' by the office of the federal register it is a process in which the selection of the electors,the meeting of the electors where they vote for the new upcoming president and vice president, and the counting of the electoral votes by congress. Many citizens or congress men are for and against the electoral college process. I am in favor of keeping the electoral college because they are chose, not just how much the voters like them but their cababilities so more modern. Also more reliable.
To begin with, I am in favor of keeping the electoral college because it is more reliable than election by popular vote. When you vote for the presidential election you help select your state's electors when you vote for president of your choice because when you vote for your candidate your actually voting for your candidates electors. As stated in paragraph six in source one. Also these electors aren't just every day people they are carryfully selected to take place in these events. For example, you walk into your local precint to vote on the fourth year on the tuesday after the first monday in november. You enter your voting booth and vote for the president of your choice, so you think. You are actually voting for your states electors. so thats one of the reasons why we should keep the electoral college.
In addition, I am in favor of keeping the electoral college because it is more modern,accurate and reliable. Most people vote for the president of there choice becuase of what they say theyll while in presidency, or how good they look, rescent experince, and how much they like that perticular president. Do you really want some one who knows nothing about the president of thier choice but how good they look,to vote for the the next leader of our country. As stated in paragraph eight in source one it states that the electors represnt our vote and choosse president accordingley. For example, a women walks into her local pricent and decides to vote for the president that looks better that isnt an ancurate vote cause she just voted for the president she likes and what if want to run this country into the ground. so thats why I am in favor of keeping the electoral college.
To conclude, because the electoral college is more reliable and more accuerate is why i am in favor of keeping the electoral college. So on that fourth year on the tuesday after the first monday of november you go into to make your vote make a wise choice and remeber your voting for your state's electors. | 2 |
I Think is a great technology to now the students emotional expresions,and now their felings with that technology and can prevent allout of things. the process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like humans muscles. Movement of one or more muscles is called an action unit. Then Dr. Huang relies on the work of psychologist, such as Dr. Paul Eckman,creator of FACS [ Facial,Action Coding system]. Eckman has classified six basic emotions-happines,surprise, anger,disgust,fear,and sadness-and then associated each with characteristic movements of the facial muscles. In my conclusion imagine a computer that knows when you' re happy or sad that is awesome in my opinion that is Great we can prevent bullyng in the future bring help for students and other people, we can now if the student or person is in difficult times in her life or is happy in my conclusion i think that this technology will help the people in the future, the New Software is A great job that is my conclusion Thanks you. | 1 |
The use of technology to read students' emotional expressions might be the new advacement of science. This technology uses different muscles in the face to uncover what a person might be feeling at the moment. In Paragraph 4 it states, "By weighting the different units, the software can even identify mixed emotions." This use of technology uses the muscles, orbicularis, zygomatic, and risorious to distinguish any fake emotion. This software will help many students and careers to come.
This technology should be placed in classrooms as a helping tool. Teachers can not read students minds and help each individual when they are confused. Using this technology will make the job of teachers so much more easier. The students will now, using this technology, advance in school and understand every single topic that they are faced with. As it states in Paragraph 5, "His new computer software stores similiar anatomical information as electronic code." This shows that the information gained in this software is reliable and should be taken advantage of for our students. Students finally have a way to rely and get help. By using this emotion recognizer it will help understand non-verbal communication better, giving us a sense of the human body and how it expresses emotions by not talking about it. Paragraph 6 reinforces this idea by saying, "A classroom compute could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored... then it could could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." Although it has its cons the idea of this technology over all will benefit the students. By modifiying a classroom towards how the students are feeling will improve grades rapidly and the knowledge that the students will consume.
The more technology kids are exposed to in the classroom the more they will learn. This device will improve generations and help them to actually understand what the teacher is talking about. It will help universities get through a career easier and more positions in the job industry will open up. This software will help many students and careers to come. | 3 |
In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" the aouthor presents two both possitive and negative aspects of driverless cars. In which i found that a driverless car would not be a good idea. I found this to not be a well thought out plan due to the technology could fail, the cars can't navigate through work zones or around accidents and human drivers would eventually get bored of sitting there and doing nothing and would want to eventually drive.
First, thing that would be on anyones mind about being in a car that you can not fully control is what if an accicdent was to accour or the car's systems began to fail? Who would be blamed the driver or the company that produced the car? In the article the author states that "...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 fualt- the driver or the manufacturer?" This proving that when the laws are changed the person whom is at fualt may not at all be fair since it could have been the manufacturer's fualt and not the driver.
Second, reason why driverless cars would not be all the great is because the cars can not navigate throught work zones and accidents, so what goood would a driverless car be when it can not even navigate around everyday issues. In the story it states "They can steer, accelerate, and break 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 showing hwo the driverless cars won't be complettely driverless which would then compleicate things for certain drivers and, or the manufacturers in case of a navigation error.
Lastly, drivers would eventually get bored of just not doing anything and would want to drive but would not be able to because there cars would be self driven. Inthe article on paragraph 8 it states "Why would anyone want a driverless car that still needs a driver? Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?..." This evoctaing how not only would you get bored while waiting since you can do other things while in the car if you have to drive and you are doing somthing which you can't automaticlly take over it could cause and accident and it would not be at all safe.
In conclusion, driverless cars are not a good idea due to the fact that the technology could fail and then who would be at fualt may be a problem or simple unfair. The cars can not go through work zones or accidents so why would you want a driverless car that you still have to drive in case of something like that. Thirdly, drivers would be bored waiting for there turn to drive and if they were to do something else and could not automaticlly take conrol that could cause issues for themselves and other drivers. So why would you want a self-driven car when driving so such so much more fun and better? | 2 |
Is venus dangerous? "Let's find out," " Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size." "Earth,venus,and mars is our planetary neighbors,orbiting at different speeds." "If a spacecraft landed on venus, the spacecraft wouldn't have survived no more than a few hours." "Humans have sent many spacecrafts to venus but none came back or survived." Venus's surface temperature average is 8oo degrees fahrenheit,and the atomospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience than our planet." "These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on earth;such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and wouldf liquefy many metals." "Also notable Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system and even Mercury is closer to the sun." "Venus was once like Earth planet in our solar system." "Lomg ago Venus was probably most covered largely with oceans and could have supported the forms of life,Venus today has some features that are analogous to those on earth." "Scientist's are sending humans to study Venus,NASA's possible solution to the hostlie conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray." "Imagine a blimp like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roling venusian landscape." "A vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying uo abd out of their way." | 1 |
The founder of the Google Car project, Sebastian Thrun, said "There was no way, before 2000, to make something interesting." Now, there is something extremely interesting in the process of being developed, driverless cars. However, driverless cars are raising some concerns to states, most of which have them banned. People should not be concerned about the development of driverless cars due to the fact that the positive aspects greatly outweigh any possible negative consequences. If driverless cars continue to develop, safety will increase, new technological innovations will be discovered and the environment will benefit.
The first positive aspect one should consider when regarding driverless cars is the increase of safety. Driverless cars are thought to have in-car entertainment systems much like the dangerous cell phone use currently being used in cars. On the other hand, in-car entertainment systems will be turned off instantly when a driver needs to pay attention to what is happening on the road or take over for the car. According to the passage, "In this way, the in-car system is actually a safety feature, and safety is a big concern." Distracted driving is one of the leading causes of death, especially for teenagers and the use of driverless cars may be able to virtually eliminate this threat. Also, one of the biggest threats on the road is other drivers. In the case of driverless cars, other people being reckless on roads or not paying attention will be all but eliminated, making the road a much safer place.
Furthermore, not only will the safety of everyone on the road be dramatically increased, but new technological advances and innovation towards driverless car will be discovered. Driverless cars and the sensors that operate them are nothing new, however, the creative ways developers are using them to mimic human driving is. The passage states, "In the 1950's, General Motors created a concept car that could run on a special test track." In only a short span of time since then, technology has developed to the point of being able to put a self-driving car on any road. The rapid evolution of technology will only be aided if driverless cars are further developed. In fact the passage says, "Tesla has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 percent of the time. Mercedes-Benz, Audi and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by 2020." If driverless cars continue to develop then the technological innovations made to these cars could be as unimaginable as driverless cars on this scale were in the 1950's.
Lastly, the development of driverless cars will not only improve technology, but it will also yield environmental benefits. According to Google co-founder Sergey Brin in the passage, "The cars he forsees would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus." Using only half the fuel of today's taxis would have a huge environmental impact for the better. Less fuel would be used and the fuel that is used will be able to go a longer way. With constant searches for new places to find fuel from drilling and fracking to importing, being able to stretch the fuel has more positive aspects than one. Harmful fumes given off would be reduced if fuel was cut in half and also the demand would decrease, making the needed supply decrese as well. This could greatly reduce the use of fuel extraction methods that are harmful to the environment. Also, less fuel needed would help to prolong the far future when fuel might be at risk of being depleted, making development of driverless cars would have a positive impact on the environment.
Thus, the combination of increased safety, technological innovation and enviormental benefits make the development of driverless cars a positve step towards an interesting future in which no one buys cars because no one needs them anymore. | 4 |
Is using technology to show emotional expresions of students in classrooms good? As a teen who attends School and as a person who gets confused easily i Would agree that is a good idea. Some people are to shy or just simply nervouse to ask for help and they dont ask. Having a Computer that could recognize when its confused Helps not only the students but the teacher Most teachers go on When not really knowing that a student has been left behind. As students we go through things that most people dont know and that can aslo trigger are behavoir and distractions in class and if a computer can see that it can help the student.
Tracking down a student while doing a lesson might be difficukt you can be focus on one student while the other student is confused. But while using The computer it can help all the students because if helps it dectect when a student is confused. 'A classroom computer could recognize when a studeent is becoming confused or bored" Sometimes teachers arent able to notice it and students end up doing other stuff and they never learn like that but with the help of the new technology it can change.
Most students in school dont want to tell when somethung is bothering them. But that can also affect the way a student is learning they can be thinking about something else and when its time to do it they arent able to. They are confused the teacher might not be able to dectect that fast but the computer can "Most human communication is nonverbal including emotional communication". The computer understands that. | 2 |
The first time NASA first spotted the Face on Mars was in 1976 during the Viking 1 mission. At first the scientists back at NASA were surprised, but it did not last long. After some research was done scientists figured it was just another Martian mesa. What made the mesa look like a face were just shadows. When the image was revealed to the public it got a lot of attention. Although some believed the face was a sign of alien life, others were not as easily convinced.
The first picture was taken in 1976 when technology was not very great. So in 1997
NASA 's Mars Exploration Program chief scientist, Jim Garvin decided he'd try to get another photo. On April 8, 1998 Mars Global Surveyor flew over the site again. Michael Malin and his MOC team took a picture that was, "Ten times sharper than the original Viking photos," the article says. But other conspiricy theorists think otherwise.
The article mentions that the Face on Mars is located at 41 degrees north martian latitude. It was apparently winter there in April of '98. Skeptics say, "Perhaps alien markings were hidden by the haze." Garvin says, "Targeting Cydonia was not easy...in fact it is hard to work." Mars Global Surveyor noramally looks straight down but in order to get a good picture, they would have to actually move the camera 2.5 km. They also do not pass over the face very often.
On April 8, 2001 they attempted another picture. This time the picture was perfect. It was a cloudless day in Cyndonia. "The team had to roll the spacecraft 25 degrees to center the Face in the field of view." Garvin said. Not easy work. The article also mentions that each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to the 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photos. I think that this picture did really prove that the Face was only a landform and not some kind of martian marking.
In the end people came to relize that the Face on Mars was really on a butte or a mesa of some sort. Garvin says, "So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground...you could have seen what they were." I personally do not think the Face is part of ancient Martian life but as Garvin says, "It reminds me of most of the Middle Butte in the Snake River of Idaho." I hope now that the others that once believed in the face now relize it really was only their imagination. | 2 |
Many elections have gone bad in the United States. Just like wat it says in "The indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the systems are wong", there were many "disaster factors" in the system during elections. Also, delegates in the electoral college don't even vote for their own party's canditate, they just fool around and choose the other candidate. We should abolish the electoral college and change the election by popular vote.
To begin with, there were many "disaster factors" in the system for the electoral college. In "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why Even the Best-Laid Defenses of the Systems Are Wrong", it states that back in 1960, segregationists almost succeds in putting in new electors to oppose John F. Kennedy. Also, it states that there are "faithless" electors that refuse to vote for their party's candidate which is pretty sad. There are more reaons why we should bann the electoral college.
Furthermore, population is a big factor also in the electoral college. "In Defense of the electoral college: Five Reasons to Keep Our Despised Method of Choosing the President" It states that the electoral college restores some of the weight in the political balance of large states. It's wrong because the big states are the ones that need that population in order for the candidate to win. It's pretty fair to do it by popuation because it depends on that specific person on which candidate is gonna win, not by the state.
That leads to the fact that electoral votes are not the same as voters voting for the president. Many presidents lost the election just because of the electoral college. Personally, it's not fair that a candidate can't become president just because of the electoral college. it even says it in "The indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the systems are wong". It states that voters do not vote for the president, but for a slate of electors that will elect the president. Nobody knows if that person is loyal or not.
In conclusion, the electoral college should be banished from this country. It is a terrible system that had many "disaster factors" in it and also there are people that are elected that are not loyal to their party. If we don't stop it now, who knows what will happen to this magnificent country. If we keep the electoral college as our system, maybe our country will go downhill, so r you willing to abolish it for the greater good? | 2 |
People seem to think that the face found on the planet Mars was created by creatures that we have not yet seen. There is no factual proof that Aliens even exist, so how can they create things on the big red planet? Tabloids and false internet articles give people ideas that maybe the government is lying about aliens, and other strange things that happen that nobody really talks about.
People are guilable creatures, and believe the things that are told, even if it's rediculous! As a scientist who got their degree at Yale, and works as the head of their department at NASA, nobody will believe me when I say that this mound was not built by anyone, or anything. People ask me how i know that I am correct,and to answer that question I say that I know what it is. NASA has not been hiding top secret information from anyone, and we are very puublic about what it is. It is a mesa, young people. They are common landforms, that they even occur on Earth. They are found in America, to the west of the country.
I wanted to know if anyone had any mor ewuestions for me. People emailed me questions from all ver the country, and other countries as well. A middle aged man wrote me from Texas last week, asking if i had ever seen some of the landforms, like a mesa or butte. The answer is yes, during the summer about 5 years ago, everyone on this case took a trip there to observe, and take notes what mechanisms lived there. A teenager from California asked if i have ever had any kind of suspicians about matrians creating the face. Like always I said no, because while there is plenty of data to support a mesa, there is almost no actual scientific proof of anyone seeing a martian.
Science changes over periods of time as technology and people progress. I feel that we will keep doing research over this face, but that won't change. Out of the all of the years that I have been trying to work with my team and put the peices together over and over again to make sure that we are right, I can't see any data changing. So do not be another guilable human who listens to tabloids and false internet articles and rumors. Listen to the facts of NASA scientists, you can trust us. | 2 |
The way I would convince someone that the Face was just a natural landform. Is that I would first tell that person that it was just shadows giving it the illusion of facal fitures. Then I would tell that person that it's the unusual shadows that make it look like a Pharaoh .Then I would tell that person that there is no scientific effidence that the Face is a alien or some sort of artifact .
And if that person still thinks that it could ever be a face and not a natural landform. I would tell that person that its a natural rock formation and is not a face . Then I would ask that person if you found a pepple that looked like a face. Would you think that humans were once the size of a pepple. Or that if you heared that chocalte milk comes from brown cows would you belive it .
And if that person had a fracture of hope still that it was a face. I would say to that person that you should not believen stuff that can't be proven . Then i would show that person the 2001 photo and ask him does that look like a face . Then i would tell that person that it's something similliar to that butte or mesa landforms around American West. And that is how I would convince that person that the Face is just a natural landform. | 1 |
Ask yourself, would I like to see driverless cars for public transport? I mean even if you did not there are a ton of positives with it. In the passage it gave tons of examples of why it is good and why it is bad to have driverless cars. Some readers such as me are on the positive side and others are on the negative side. One individual will not decide the entire decision on whether we have driverless cars or not but it might help. The future of driverless cars is in our future as we know it.
In the passage it says that driverless cars have drove over a half a million miles without a wreck! That is a ton of miles without a single wreck, I bet that is way less wreck than what a human driven car has. In my mind that is one huge advantage to the driverless cars because it would help with less accidents and be safer for everyone around. Even though they are not completely driverless that is still very impressive, I mean the only time they driven would be in and out of driveways for the car to get started. The car stops at stop signs and lights by itself and has had no crashes, that is unbelievable!
With all the people driving and all the cell phones around you can imagine that people still text and drive even though it is illegal right? If you have a driverless car people will stop texting and driving and start texting and ridiing. With the driverless cars those people who think they need o get a text off every minute will actually be able to without crashing into you! Although there are parts where they will eventually have to drive that is a lot less time for them to text and drive than it is when they text and rvie the entire time. Even with out texting and driving that is a ton less crashes and ton of more people saved each year.
Even if you are not still into the driverless car experience yet, just wait there is more! If you are one of those people who ask; Can you still drive? Obviously you still can! The car will have back out of driveways and onto roadway construction and through accidents. So there is no need to worry about it ddriving through bad areas or location becuase you have to! Plus when it driving and it getting ready to do something bad it sends a vibration into your seat to let you know that you have to take over the wheel and start driving.
With all of the facts listed how can you not be with the flow of driveless cars? Well really they are not completely driverless but pretty much close. With all the less accidents how can someone not want a driverless car? Even the pedestrians will be safer without all the drunk and texting drivers around town. To be even safer if you do not trust it you can still take over the wheel in certain situations. Most importantly you have more time to do the things you want like maybe knit while driving or catch up on a book. You can do many things with a safe driverless car! | 3 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.