full_text stringlengths 737 20.5k | score int64 0 5 |
|---|---|
What are the advantages of limiting car use? The germans don ussally use cars. Paris bans cars due to somg in their state. Car free days are sping to a big hit in Colombia,Bogota. The end of car culture is near in the United States Of America.
The Germas have given up their use of cars. Some residents of the upscale community in Germany are suburban pioneers and a few scoocer moms are the ones who give up their cars. Street parking and driveways are fobidden in some districts. Germans can buy a large garage that cost $40,000 along with the home. 70% of Vauban's famileis don't own cars and 57% sold their cars to move into that distric.
Paris had to ban cars due to somg in their state. On monday motorists with even numbers had to leave their vichle at home if they refused they had to pay 22-euro fine ($31).Almost 4,000 drivers were fined by the international agency headquartered in London. In fact Paris has more somg than European capitals. The somg cleared enough to rescined the ban for odd-numbers on tuesday.
Car free day in Colombia Bogota is a big hit. Three srtight years cars have been baned with only buses and taxis permited."Rian didn't stop people from participating, said Bogota Mayor Antanas."For the first time two other cites,Cali and Valledupar, joined the event. The day with out cars is parr of a improvement campian.
Some of the contries are take a step foward to stop gasses from going up into the atmosphere. For instance Paris baned even number licence plates on Monday and ood number on Tuesday. Germany stop using their cxars and some of them say they're happier that way. In colombia Bogota have a day where they can not use their cars unless for buses and taxis. | 0 |
In Vauban, Germany. Residents of the upscale community have given up their cars. Street parking, driveways and home garages are forbidden in the new district near the French and Swiss borders. The streets are completely "car-free", but downtown Freiburg car ownership is allowed but there is only two places to park- large garage, or a home. 70% of Vauban families do not own cars. A mother of two had said "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way" as she walks the streets where the swish of bicycles an chatter of children drown the occasional motor. There's plenty of advantages of limiting car usage. It makes cities denser, and better for walking, planners now takeing the concept to the suburbs. In a new approach, stores have placed a walk way on a main street, rather than in malls along some highway. Some new suburbs may well look more Vauban-like, not only in developed contries but also in the developing world. The Enviornmental Protection Agency is promoing "car reduced" communites.
Cars not only take up space in our cities, and towns, but it also disturbes the peace, and pollutes our air. When you are walking down the road would you rather hear the noise of cars, or the calm enviornment nature has provided us? The air in most communities is so polluted that there is a fog that lurks over their community, not saying it's all because of cars but that is a big factor in the situation. Reducing cars can reduce the number of deaths, pollution, and reduce noise. More space will be provided for our fellow citizens to walk upon and enjoy the community, roads will be safe to walk across and you wouldn't have to worry about a drunk driving accident. Limiting car usage can be more helpful to your community than it would to be increasing the numbers of cars. | 1 |
The author suggetsts that studying the harsh planet of Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. However, the author does not provide ENOUGH information to be convincing. In paragraph 7, it states that "simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulation the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions" this shows some insightful information, but there should also testing of more complicated and complex electronics and equipment. Another method the author claims is using a mechanical computer to handle the conditions. It's a good method, but it doesn't support HOW it can be used on Venus. The last method is using a blimp/plane-like aircraft to monitor Venus. It's a great method to study more about the atmosphere, but as it states "reasearchers cannot take samples of rock, gas , or anything else, from a distance" hindering the option of a thorough mission. The author has some great claims, but needs to go more in-depth as to what some of the mentioned methods will do and how they will potentially work on Venus. | 2 |
My position on self driving cars is as good as anyone elses, but my thought on self driving cars maybe different. I think that self driving cars would be beneficial to society. There would most likely be some bad thingsalong the path. Like what if the cars can not perform and hve the necesity that humans can do. People would be able to do more things while in a vehicle than to just watch the road and other vehicles. Say you were in one of these self driving cars and you had a call on your phone you would actually be able to take it instead of just letting it ring, or if you got a text you could message the human back. Now people might say thats not always good, but say you got a text from a family member saying that one someone in your family got into an accident if your were in a non-self driving car you wouldnt know till you stopped and checked your phone. On the other hand if you had a self driving car you could answer it and you would be able to text the human back. Ask where are they taking them and you would be there in no time instead of not knowing. Thus completes my thought on self driving cars hope you liked it. | 1 |
I think that the Facial face Coding System is a good thing because it can tell other peoples emotions. Also not everyone will have the same emotion. Another reason would be that the face scanner wouldnt mess up because it gets all of your face bones. Their is a doctor who studies all the basic emotions what are called happiness,surprise,anger,disgust,fear and sadness and the doctor who descovered these are Dr. Paul Eckman and they all had charcterastics movements such as your frontalis pars lateralis muscle raises your eyebrow when your suprised. The facial expressions for each emotion are universal. We always perform this same impressive calculation every day. For instance you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look of their face. Meanwhile muscles called orbicularis oculi pars palpabraeus make crows feet around your eyes. According to the faial feedback Theory of Emotion moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them. Some of this may happen because we unconsciously imitate another persons facial expressions. whoever thought that making faces could reveal so much about the science of emotions! | 0 |
Is studying Venus worthy to pursuit the ande it will presents in the future? In the article of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" states about why humans should study Venus. Students and humans should study Venus because they can anticipate will happen to the Earth, why no spaceshifts have been to Venus for more than three decades, and more importantly, how techonology can help us.
First,Venus is the second planet from the sun and it is not difficult to see from distance but it does takes up safe vantage point of Earth, it has proved a very challengeing place ro examine more closely. Astronomoes are fascinated by Venus on how it may once have been the most Earth like plantet in our Solar Systems.
Next, for the past three decades of years, previous missons was unmaned and not a single spacecrafts survided the landing to Venus for more than a few hours. This explanins why not a single spaceshifts have touched down to Venus for quite a long time. The National Areonautics and Space Administrations want to send humans to study Venus so that the possible hostile conditon on the surface of Venus would allow scientist to flot above the fray.
Finally, Modern computers are enormouslt powerful, flexible, and quick, but tend to be more delicate when it comes to extreme physical conditons. For example exposing a cell phone or a tablet to acid or heat capable of melting tin. Therefore systems that use mechanicals parts can be made of more resistants to pressure, heat, and other forces. Devices make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require eletronics.
In conclusion, if we humans study Venus, we would likely be preapred for what will happen next in the future but humans returning to Venus seem indisputable. Our travels on Earth should not be linited by dangers and dobuts but it should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation. We should be able to help our Earth for dangers coming in. | 3 |
The Author suggests that studying venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. There's many unknown plants and other objects in the universe that humans haven't studied yet. So why not get knowlegde from the universe and get to know it better.
In studying theres always curiosity, or wanting to know more things. Even traveling, but there's always a "but" or "what if ". In paeagraph 5 it says "The National Aerovautics and Space Administration( NASA) has one particularly compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus." In this sentence NASA wants people to got to Venus and study. But Earth and Venus are two different palnts with different pressure levels and oxygen levels. It's not easy to be there but it is "surviable for humans."
The Universe is so much bigger than it is expect. Probably only 5% is explored, and the other 95% is yet to be explored. Earth, Venus, and Mars is known becasue Earth is next to those planets. But what about the other planets? Paragraph 8 " Our traveks in Earth and beyond should not be limited by the dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." Yes, studying Venus is a worthy pursit despite the dangers that can be present. | 1 |
The electoral college is an unfair and outdated system. It is unfair to voters. A states electoral votes often do not tell what that state truly wants. And no candidate should face what Gore did in 2000, with a winning popular vote, but less electoral votes losing him the election. It is an outdated system that should not be used in today's modern society.
When we vote for a specific president, we are actually voting for a slate of electors. The chosen electors are supposed to support the winning candidate, but they can easily decide to ignore that and cast their vote toward whomever the please. This can cause a president to get the greatest popular vote, and still lose because they did not get as many electoral college votes once all states' votes have been combined. This should certainly not happen. Whatever candidate is preferred by the most people to take office should win the election, period. In the past, maybe it would have been good to let the more educated electors choose the president rather than any citizen, but in this modern age of knowledge, people can be trusted to choose a leader that shares in the best interests of our country. Al Gore in 2000 lost the election after winning the most popular votes. That shows us that this electoral system does not work effectively, and should not be used today.
Perhaps more worrying is the electoral college's winner-take-all system. If a candidate wins a state's election by a tiny amount, they get every electoral vote for that state. This allows candidates to ignore smaller states, or states they know they will win, and focus on larger states and ones that have a very tight election could be easily persuaded for advertisements and campaigns. Ohio is known as a state that looks at their candidates closely, and can be persuaded to choose one based on what they know about them. Candidates tend to focus more resources here or in other similar states. It makes some sense to focus more on larger populations, and states like Ohio that are more interested in the election, but during the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see the candidates at all, and could not make educated descisions during the election. In a close election, half the people in the state's views will be ignored, and will not matter to the elction. That means half of California's 35 million voters would not matter at all in the election. The fate of the election should not be put in the hands of Ohio or other "swing" states, just ignoring less important ones.
Today's society needs a more fair system of electing a president. A popular vote from everyone is the most fair way to make sure the most popular candidate wins the election, and will cause candidates to focus on all citizens, focusing on large populations, but still trying to gain popularity with rural areas as well. America's citizens deserve a fair, proper election, that satisfies the most people possible. | 4 |
Why would we need technology to read our emotions? I'm against technology to read students. The technology to read emotion is useless and waste of time. Not only that computers doesn't know emotions unless it's operated in and most time it probably won't be right. Mostly students wise, why or how would it influence our students to grow and learn from that.
Technology reading our emotions won't benefit us from anything but waste of time and money.
Our home PC can't handle the complex algorithms that decode emotion which means advanced technology. Won't have enough money to support ourselves,the school and student. The article only gives reason examples of how the software works not why it's needed. Paragraph 6 states, ""Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication," Nots Dr.Huang". Why would we have the need to ask computer to know how someone is feeling.
Computers aren't human and won't understand even if it was to read our emotions. They won't truely understand how we feel. In order for even the computer to read our emotions we need model of the faces and learn human anatomy for the muscles structure. "all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles." If we human can already tell the difference between other humans being expression than why would have the need to let computers know our emotions?
Students wouldn't learn anything from this technology. "Dr.Huang and his colleague are experts at developing better ways for humans and computers to communicate." Wouldn't we want human to interact more with other human being and go explore each culture around the world more? Technology today already is influencing us a lot to connect with others and the technology around the world but as more technology are invented, humans would lose communication with other human beings.
In my opinion, technology itself and ourself is seperating us, human beings from each other and more closer to our technology. Human communication with another human is more enjoyable and better than to communicate with computers. Most of us would spend million of bucks to get the newest technology but not even a thousand or two to go out and explore the world to interact with other humans being. So no, I wouldn't value the technology that will influence students when they won't learn anything or benefit from. | 3 |
Since the planet Venus is the closest planet to earth's density and size scientist have been trying to explore the posibilites Venus could have. Venus is the second planet from the sun which means it is very hot. Venus is 800 degrees fahrenheit and is 90 times hotter than what we experience of earth. Humans have sent many spacecrafts to Venus, but none have sucessfully made it, the ones that have landed didnt make it longer than a few hours. A spacecraft hasnt touched Venus in more than 3 decades. Venus has an atmoshere of 97 percent carbon dioxcide.
Scientists want to explore venus because since it is the closest planet it earth maybe at one time it had life. Venus likely had a great amountof ocean water and could of had many lifeforms. Venus would be our closest option if we visited a planet. Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. A blimp like vehicle hoverig 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape would be a good option. | 0 |
In the story "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" there are so many reasons for why humans should not go to venus and explore. I agree with the author, the reason why is because first of all Venus is the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, it has beyond high pressure and heat. If you want to hear more reasons for why the author and I agree that it is dangerous to go to Venus then keep on reading the story.
Venus, In the text it states that Venus "the most hottest planet in our solar system can average over 800 degrees Farenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than we experience on our own planet." If you think about it who would want to go to a planet that is over 800 degrees Farenheit, this is beyond hot weather, you would get heated up and be thirsty every single minute, and eventually you will run out of water. Another example is " each previous mission was unmanned, and for more good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe this issue explains why not a single spacehip has touched down on Venus in more than three decades." Many astronauts have attempt to go to Venus but everytime they get into an accident.
Venus also has beyond pressure too. An example is that " beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface." They haven't even landed on the planet and these are some causes they can get when they are trying to land. Astronauts have a hard job they have to risk their lives to study outside of this world and study
a whole new world. Another example is that "at thirty- plus miles surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but not survivable for humans." These example shows why these people should not go to a new world and study.
After reading this you might also think it's a bad thing to study a new world, yeah it would be great to learn what they have but have you ever thought what bad things could happen to you while you try to land or when you landed already. The difficulties you will face. Hard to survive, not having enough food and water. This all shows for why the despite the dangers. | 2 |
You should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program because you get to travel to many places. The Seagoing Cowboys are gonna be hired because we would be in charge of the horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas. They're are 335 horses plus enough hay and oats to feed them. The cattle-boat trips are unbelievable opportunity for a small-town boy. It takes about two weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United States and a month to get to China.
Caring for the animals during the crossings keeps us busy. They have to be fed and watered two or three times a day. The bales of hay and bags of oats have to be pulled up from the lower holds of the ship. And the stalls are to be cleaned. The second trip you will be served as a night watchman. You have to check on all the animals every hour. You can find some time to have fun on board, especially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded. The cowboys payed baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where animals have been housed. Table-tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and games also help pass time.
Finally, being a Seagoing Cowboy is much more than an a adventure, it can open up the world and you will be grateful for this opportunity. You will be more aware of people from other countries and their needs. The awareness will stay with you, leading your family to host a number of international students and exchange visitors for many years. | 1 |
Why should we limit our uses on car usages, some people se the limiting of car usage as less tense. " When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way" said heidrun Walter, a mother of two. when you have a car you'll have to find space for it as well as a house to buy. There are only two places to park at the edge of a development, where a car-owner has to pay $40,000, along with a home. passenger cars are responcible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe, and up to 50 percent in the United states. with less cars people have the advantages of being a walk away from a store instead of a highway. With less cars that give off gas emissions the less our ozone will deplete. More and more people are using hybrid cars because they dont give off as much gas emissions than regular cars that take diesel. Depending on the weather of the night and day could really effect the greenhouse effect of our planet. If ther was a cold night and a warm day this could help the warmer layer of air to trap the car emissions, which depletes the ozone layer that is protecting our planet.
Paris one of the most leading countries in the world with the car emissions ended making people stop using their cars because of all the smog that was being created. People who used their cars were fined $31 and if they complained about that their car would somethimes be towed away. While the rule of no cars was in effect the traffic jams in france were down over 60 percent. Think about what this could do to the United States. The smog had cleard so much that Paris eventually allowed odd numbered plates to drive again on Tuesday. " 'It's a good oppourtunity to take away stress and lower air pollution' said Carlos Arturo as he rode with his wife on a two seat bicycle" ( Andrew Selsky, Source 3). The no car rule is sweeping over the nations, because of this rule there has been over 118 miles of bicycle paths in Bogota, Colombia.
" Municipal athorities from other countries came to Bogota to see the event and were enthusiastic 'These poeple are generating a revolutionary change, and this is crossing borders' Said Enrique Riera, the mayor of asuncion, Paraguay. As of April 2013, the number of miles driven per person was nearly down by 9 percent below the peak and equal to where the country was in January of 1995. Part of the explantion lies in the recession, because cash- strapped Americans could not afford new cars, and the unimployed weren't going to work anyway. These people could not afford cars but they could have afforded a bike if they wanted to. They could have rode to work on a bike or could have tried to find a job on a bike it's that people are starting to get to lazy to do important things like ride a bike. With cars theres gas you have to pay for along with the insurence, that's a lot of money.
Lucky for us Americas love affair twords vehicles seem to be coling down. When the number of child growth grew, the number of miles driven dropped steadly down in 2005. With cars the rodes are more dangerous anything could happen to anyone or anything. The percentage of 16-39 year olds that are driving dropped, while older people retain thweir licenses as they age. A study last year was found tha driving by younger people dropped by 23 percent between 2001 and 2009. Bill Ford proposed partnering with telecommunactions industrys to create cities in which " pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improive safety". In Germeny the banning of cars resulted that 70 percent of families donot have cars, and 57 perecnt sold a car to move there. In doing all of these thing this could help stop the greenhouse effect on our planet and start saving it insted of killing it. | 3 |
I belive that diverless cars should be develped, because it could reduce the chance accidents and is a safer envoirment for living creatures. The diverless cars are smart in many ways that normal cars aren't.
They are not completely driverless but the are very close. The diverless cars are a wise choice for the future.
The Diverless cars have many cool gadget that makes the car safer. The car comes with a Spinning sensor on the roof which is laser beams constantly updating 3D model of the car surroundings. The diverless car also has a video camera on the rear view mirror that is always watching the diver, to insure that they are always paying attention. The car also has 4 atomotive sensors, and a GPS recevier. As you can see all of these things make the car safe and easy.
These cars are not completley driverless, they do need human skills in some senarios, such as when the car approches a car accedent it would need the driver to drive through it. If this were to happen then the car would vibrte the drivers seat to warn them that there is a dangerous situation and they need to intervine. Other than that the car can do many things it can steeer its self, accelerate, and brake with no human help required.
The diverless cars are not legal everywhere yet. Due to the cars not being
completely developed yet, auto makers are still solving problems with the car. The automakers belive that the car will be on autopilot 90% of the time. Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and nissan predict that the cars will drive themselces by 2020. | 2 |
Dear, senator
I honestely think that it should be popular vote instaed of the electoral college. i think that because its going to effect our lives, our way of living, and how our way of life is going to work. If we pick a president then thats who we wanted now what a group of people want.
Having a popular vote is the same thing but with more people and more accurate.
The way we like to live is the better wa, not being forced on how to live our lives. It is also a faster prosses to vote. If the group all are equal then they have to wait a longer time to see who the presedent is going to be and no one wants that. If i can ask you one question its going to be "how long will you be willing to wait to see who the new presedent id going to be?" The people of nthe united states dont want to wait, they want to see who the presedent is going to be the week after they vote.
Can we live the way we want to live
? can we live our lives without something happening that changes everything? Most of the time no, there is always something/someone that changes things in our lives. Like in 2001 the twin towers got hit by a plane, that changed everything. the way we go through airports, the way we fly, the way how people find jobs, and how people look and their beliefs. Some people are judged by what they do for living or what they look like , but thats the point of freedome in the united states. If we have a popular vote in the US they most of that will change and i can garantee that more laws will be fast that will help the US.
I'm going to agree with Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and Bob Dole. they all wanted the electoral collede to be abolished. there is no need to have them if we have the people in out states. The people in out states have a big use in voting. without the people then whats the use in being in states why not just one big land. Every state has its own way of voting but the peoples votes really dont mean anything with the electoral college. The electoral college just take over voting and wont let the people oppinions work in voting. Without them our votes will mean something, not just thrown away and just be forgotten.
If they stay they should be used for emergencies . If by any chance everyone has a tie they should be the tie breaker.
Most ruls shouldnt just be in texas or california.
They should occure in all states.
why do only two states get special treatment? If every state had tghe same rulls do you think it would be more fair to all the states? If not then i dont know what to say, because im pretty sure in one of the amendmendments it states thats "every human being will be treated equal no matter what."So this is my tought on how we should vote and that is by popular vote.. | 1 |
My claim will be going against this because nobody knows how a person is feeling. Anyone can put a smile on their face just to get through the day and be feeling so much or simply going through alot but only someone whom is close to that person can probably detect their emotions and by their facial expressions on how theyre feeling. So when in the passage it stated faces dont lie these muscle clues are sometimes used when spotted when a smiling politician or celebrity isnt being truthful I disagreed. How would they know that if they just met them and are simply having a conversation maybe even if the celebrity or politician is or isnt being honest the subject may have made them feel uncomfortable or upset them but to say theyre not being truthful isnt the case because you dont know them enough to say how their feeling, or if their being dishonest based on the other peoples faces you've" studied". Since everyone is different we act differently we look differently we react differently so to say something like studies have shown that if the corners of your lips arent going upward when talking to someone theyre being dishonest is obsered. This isnt meant to offend the experts in faciacl mucles just my beliefs | 1 |
The Venus is second planet from our sun. The Venus is the hottest surface remperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun. It is 800 degrees Fahrenheit.
Venus is the closest planet to earth densigy. People sent numerous spacecraft to land on his cloud draped world. No spacecraft survived that land for more than a few hours.
A long time ago Venus is cover with largely oceans and various froms of life just like Earth. Venus still has some feature that are analogous to those on Eart. The planet has a surface or rocky asediment and includes familar feature such as valleys, mountains, and craters. At thirty-plus miles about the surface, temperature would still be toasty at around 170 degree Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth.
NASA is working on other approaches to studying venus. For example, like electronic made of silicon and it been tested in chamber simulation the chaos of Venus surface and have lasted for three weaks in such conditions. They have another project to look back an old technology call mechanical computers. This devices make calculation by using gears and levers and do not require electronics at all. Modern computers are enormously powerful, flexible, and quick but tend to be more delicate when it come to exterme physical conditions. By comaprison, systems that use mecanical parts can be made more resistant to pressure, heat, and other forces. | 0 |
As a teen you wanted to drive. You wanted that freedom to go anywhere on your own. When we are young we dont relize the damage driving a car does to our world. It effects green house gasses, and C02 levels. In my opinion it also makes the human race lazier, or less athletic you could say. I'm a high school student, and to be honest I still want to be able to drive. But with limitation. I live about at most 3 miles from every place I need to go daily. Theres thift shops, Family Dollar and game stores within a mile of my home, and a 7-11 not much farther, Theres also a Naborhood Wall-Mart in 3 miles. The only place thats not in walking distance is school, and I just take the bus. My Mom daily drives to atleast one of these, I dissagree with that. Everytime I go walk with my 3 younger sisters, we go down nd have fun. While yes our feet hurt later, its still worth it.
"VAUBAN, Germany-Residents of this upscale community are suburban pioneer, going where few soccer moms or commutin executives have ever gone before: they have given up their cars." In Vauban any street parking is forbidden, along with driveway and garage parking. They are what you would call a "car-free" suburban area. While you can own a car, there are only two places to park on the edge of the development and it charges a rediculious fee to park there. Due to this 70% of Families there don't own a car. "When I had a car I was allways tense. I'm much happier this way," Said Heidrun Walter a mother who moved their with her family. They got lots of positive feedback from families in the development.
Are we Americans causing most of our issues with gasses from cars? Luckily no. "Recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by." As said by Elisabeth Rosenthal, the writer of the passage "The End of Car Culture" which go's into whether car numbers are increasing or decreasing, and whats in the future for it. She says that it seems like America has gone down, and pasted the peak on cars. While you might counter, "Thats just the economy effecting how everyone spends their money and cars werent at the top." But people who stopped because of the recession may have no reason to restart that habit.
Biking, A healthy way to transport your self from one place to another. It keeps you fit, more active. Alot of issues with people today is if they are over weight or not. While I'm not saying that just because your thin that your healthy. If you dont exercise or eat well you aren't. To be Healthy and fit also doesnt mean body builder extremes. All I'm saying is as a person being healthy is easy, we just make it hard. When you see that donut instead of the carrot. or the couch instead of the bike. It seems like an ultimatum that our mind invents. When in reality we can have both. If everyone had to walk places it would make that mind oggling ultimatum easier. Forcing us to walk more instead of drive everwhere would make couch and donut time more aceptible.
Everyone wants to drive, with the freedom of going anywhere. I know the feeling. But overall we over drive, even if the amount has lowered. It's no secret that it effects our town, our country, our world with C02 levels rising. I'm notsaying lets get rid of cars completely. But if everyonce in a while before you pick up your keys to go down to the near by 7-11, take a moment and set down your keys and walk. | 2 |
Do you know what a Seagoing Cowboy is? They are more important than a regular cowboy. They are people who go out to sea after a war or something, and take care of animals that were shipped overseas. Doing this is a amazing experience and can change your life.
You might think that it is stupid, but I bet you do not think the military is stupid and that is who you are working for. It might not be out there battiling, but you are saving animals lives and providing food, clothing, transportation etc. When you bring them back to the people. Not only are you helping people you get to see amazing views. Plus there is more than one job on the ship that you can do.
While I was on the ship it was a huge adventure. Every now and then we get to go on tours and explore the world. When we were on the ship and there were not any animals aboard we played games, and just had fun while going to the next stop. We played games where we would have kept the animals. This is a serious matter, but you can also have fun and be responsible. When you are on the ship you have to be careful and responsible, You can have fun every now and then, but you cannot be playing all the time.
This was much more than adventure. I really got to see the world and the people there that had many needs. What the world really was that I had not payed much attention to. This is a lot better then trying to have two part time jobs. I am serving my country, and if you want to but do not want to fight I would say you should do this.
It is a once in a life time event. Coming from a small town and doing this. You can do it to, and you should. All you have to do voulenteer and maybe when you are out there and apply for the military they will keep you out there. Serving your country. You will not believe how it will change your life and make you feel accomplished. Besides all the tours and the fun it really is amazing. | 3 |
I think driverless cars will be a good idea for the world. Driverless cars would help younger people on driving. Also, It would be better for the economy. Last it would be better on gas as it shows in the text. I have more reasons, but these are my best reason.
Driverless cars would help youngers people on driving because younger people have a higher ricks in getting in an accidents. By them being on their phone to much. For example, if a younger driver gets a text while driving. Nine out of ten of them would read the message and send one back while driving. which could lead to a accident. Also, younger drivers are not prone to their surroundings.
Having driverless cars would be better for the economy. By the price of the cars being more than a regular car now of days. Parents of children would buy the cars so, their children will be safe getting place to place. Every parents wants their child safe at all times. Also, it could help the USA from being in dept with other countries. Last it would help the economy by having a increase in the market.
The driverless cars would be better on gas. In the story "Driverless Cars Are Coming'', it talks about how the price of the driverless cars would be half the price of it now. The driverless cars would run longer without having to be refilled. The cars would get places that are far faster than a regular car because a regular car would have to stop more to fill up their tanks. Leading to them having to spend more time to get to their locations.
That is why I think driverless cars would be better than regular cars. They would be better for younger drivers. It would help the economy better, too. Also, it would be better on gas. There are many more reasons why driverless cars are better than regular cars. These are my most important reason why driverless cars are better. I hope you agree. | 3 |
So driverless cars are coming and what is your opinion on them? Do yo think they are a good thing? Do you think they are a bad thing. I'm here to tell you why I think driverless cars are a good thing for people.
First of all, speed limit would be followed by everyone. Usually people don't drive the speed limit. If driverless cars happen, then we can make them go the speed limit. I think going the actual speed limit will reduce car accidents.
Second of all, the person in the car could still take control of the vehicle if needed. This is a good thing because if a turn or park is to difficult for the car itself, then the driver can take control and do the obstacle for the car. This will prevent the car from malfunctioning.
Finally, I think it will make it easier on a lot of people. If someone is handicapped the car is there to just drive for them if they can't drive for a long time. I also personally think it will reduce accidents because of how fast you are going.
In conclusion, Driverless cars are coming and while there are downsides, I feel that positive overweighs the negative. That is why I am for driverless cars. Do you think they are good thing for people? | 2 |
I think using the technology Facial Coding System won't work trying to find out how a person is feeling because how could you know what a person is feeling unless you ask them, now I know that a person might be able to tell how your feeling by looking at you, but now we don't use technology to tell how a person's feeling we just look at their facial expressions to tell if their happy, sad, mad, frustrated, or any emotion that their feeling I think we can only tell by looking at their facial expression, they said that by looking at the painting of Mona Lisa that they could tell that she was feeling 83 percent happy, 9 percent, disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 perent angry, now you would never know if she's happy, fearful, disgusted, or angry unless you were with her at that time of the picture you would never know how she's feeling. Thats probably how she takes all of her pictures you never know, she could have been feeling sad, mad, fearful, or anything unless you were with her at that time of the painting andd she told you how she was feeling. In conclusion I don't think the Facial Coding System will work to tell how a person is feeling. | 1 |
The Face was not created by aliens because there is no evidence on The Face to be able to test to see if it was created from an alien. We have searched The Face to find out to see if The Face was made by aliens, and the face was not crafted from aliens because we have not seen a single artifact, text, and/or any symbols near this landscape.
Since we have not seen an artifact in the landscape we could tell that there were no aliens near this area. Since we have not seen an artifact, yes, they could have maybe known that they dropped it and culd have gone searching for it, but then what about the other aliens they could have dropped any crafting utensils at the sight.
Now if there were any text in english then the text could have been from a fellow american space travelar, now if it was made by an alien the text wouldn't be in english, but there is no text in the sight because we haven't seen any so therefore it was not made from an alien, now if it were to be made from an alien they would have text or symbols on The Face because they wouldn't just leave it like that and then walk away. They would have put text or symbols.
Talking about symbols there are zero amount of symbols on that artifact because like I said earlier they would have put text or symbols on the artifact, but there are none of those things.
This shows how there was no chance of The Face showing that there were aliens building it. | 2 |
This article is going to change the world toady as we know. If we allow our computers to identify human emotions, its a whole new way to look at life. People will be able to get what the want when they want because their computer will know when they are happy or mad at something. For instance, if you are online shopping and your face seems disgusted by a bright yellow shirt, the computer will see your expression and change the shirt to a blue one. By having that change be done for you, people will instantly become happier and have what they want right in front of them.
In my opinion, this new use of technolgy could be very helpful for many people. In the essay, it states the percent of emotions that the painting of Mona Lisa is. No one could ever be that spot on, so with the Facial Action Coding System, we now have the precise percents of what Mona Lisa's emotions are. By having these percents, we now have a blast to the past to think about what Leonardo da Vinci was thinking while painting this portrait. Maybe the reason she was mostly happy is because he was a genuinely happy person. It opens up a whole new door to what we can study and research. Since no one from back then is still alive today, this is our way of finding out not only what he was doing, but better yet what he was thinking! There is not a single machine that can do that today, so having this device would be a game changer.
Although the Facial Action Coding System would be an amazing new technology to have, many people could disagree with the system. Since having this system means that something, or even someone, is always watching you, people could feel that it is an invasion of personal space. They would alwasy feel like someone is there, even though no one is. It could lead to mental problems, such as thinking you are not alone and that people are watching your every move. Because of this, the system could be a bad call and lead to a bigger failure then they hoped. Today we are already facing problems with hackers hacking into our webcams and recording what we do without knowing it. This system is doing the exact same thing, but without the trouble of hacking. Unfortunately, it is already there with us knowing exactly what it is doing.
Although the Facial Action Coding System could have some problems, the success could be even bigger than the possible failure. Nothing like this has ever been made before, so the reaction to something like this could be endless. All in all, I believe that this new system is one that could change the world for good! | 2 |
My position on the driverless car is i think it is very interrestiing on how it works but it wouldnt be something i would want to have or "drive". My reason being is that like it said in the pasage is that they aret completly driverless you still have to be alert so when you have to take over for the car you can which i think would be pointless because if the car was 100 percent driverless on a long trip you could take a nap or text people or get on social media but with these cars like the passage says is that if there is construction then the person has to take over so its bascilly like driving you just dont have to control the car all the time but another down fall is that you have to keep your hands on the sterring wheel all the time because in the passage it said the steering wheel had sensors in it to make sure the driver was alert in case of a problem.
Another thing is the fact that if you were to get in a accident in the car would it be your fault or the car companys and how would insurance take care of that if one person was in a driverless car and the other was not or if both were in a driverless car who would be a fault and have to pay, how would insurance work because insurance is based on the human driving past and experience but if the car was driving how would the insurance be based. | 1 |
I am against driverless cars for three reasons. they are not fully driverless, they cant fully navagate of thier own, and if the car make a mistake and hit something it would be the driver's fault.
The first reason why i am against the developement of driverless cars is the car is not fully driverless. there is no point of a car that drives on its own if you still have to turn and navigate through construction on you own. if there was to be a car that drives on its on it should be able to fully drive on its own. the driverless car cant controll it's self. it cant control when to stop before hitting somethin.
The second reason why i am against the driverless car is the car cant fully navigate. so you still have to stop for padestrians. if the car cant navigate you still have to stop and take control of the car. i would if i was to have a driverless car i wouldnt want to still have to take controll, i would want to get what i paid for.
The third reason why i am against the driverless car is if you hit something or somebody you will still be held responsible. in paragraph nine it states "lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers. driverless cars are more dangerous and thats why it is illigal to drive computer-driven cars
in most states. "california, nevada, florida and the district of columbia have led the country in allowing limited use of semi-autonomous cars"
In conclusion i am against the driverless car because they are not fully driverless, they can not fully navigate on their own, and if the driver make a mistake and hit something, even though the car drive on its own, it would still be the driver's fault. | 2 |
From the small town of Cocoa, Florida, to the busy streets of Beijing, China, driving cars is a global phenomenon. It could be said that reducing the use of cars is beneficiary to the human population. Although, some believe that the negative effects of limiting automobile usage will surely outweigh the positive outcomes. The superior argument, however, is overall, less vehicle use.
Limiting car use would be an improvement to society on a global scale. According to source 1, passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe. This shows that the the excessive use of transportation harms the ozone layer. Even at 12 percent, the percentage will gradually increase and later will become an even more significant threat to Earth's atmoshere. According to source 4, transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions, just behind powerplants. If the numbers were reduced, it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment. This would cause less pollution and more breathable air in the long run. The world we share will become uninhabitable if we continue in these environmental patterns.
Furthermore, there is more justification for the advantages of limiting car usage. According the source 2, congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France. This was due to the fact that Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air five days before. The amount of time it took to air out smog that rivaled Beijing,China is an impressive factor of being fuel efficient. According the source 3, Bogota Columbia has a program where, for a day, you go around town car-free. It is part of an improvement campaign that began in Bogota in the mid-1990s. This has lead to the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths, the most of any Latin American city. Not only does the environment become more habitable, but your physical health is improved as well.
However, some would argue that limiting vehicle use is not the route to go. According to source 2, when the Paris driving ban was enforced, delivery companies complained of lost profit. This is not completeley true since plug-in cars, hybrids, and other earth-friendly cars were unaffected by the Parisian ban. Car companies will still be in business because of the use of green cars instead of foosil fuel-powered automobiles. According to source 4, demographic research has shown that 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. This may harm the next generation as they become more dependent on alternative methods of traveling. It does not mean, however, that they won't have similar efficiency of speed and reliability with different transportations as they would now. The goverenment will have more money from public transportation to improve upon the community, and greener way. of traveling, like walking or bike riding, will create stronger immune systems and keep the majority of the population in healthy physical shape. The argument of the disadvantages of limiting car usage is somewhat counterproductive, as shown in this paragraph.
Cars, one of the less significant necessities of a well functioning society, will continue to be used. Children, teens, and adults alike will all be affected by the results of driving. We do require a method of convienient transportation for daily occurences, however, there is an extent over how much driving is sufficient to continue our everyday lives. Whatever an individual's decision may be, the amount of car usage will determine the living conditions on Earth for generations to come. | 5 |
As time progresses, so do classroom education and the technological innovations applied to it. While teachers search for helpful methods to engage their pupils in education, the world of science develops more and more inventions, such as the Facial Action Coding System, to improve standards of living. Despite its putative effectiveness in other fields such as advertisement or marketing, Facial Action Coding System technology possesses no place of value in a classroom and would serve as a hinderence to a student's learning process.
Although this software may serve as an effective source of profit for online corporations, it has no valueable place in classrooms. In the sixth paragraph of the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile," the author illuminates the possibilites of success human-emotion-recognizing computer software provides in terms the world of marketing, describing how analyzing the emotional response to a Web ad popping up on one's computer screen can mold the variety of its future ads to a more preferred selection (6). While this software may be helpfully applicable to marketing schemes, its analyzation of human emotions would only deter from a student's learning in the classroom due to its possible misinterpretations and miscalculations. Verbal human communication is relied upon to determine what about a lesson plan confuses a student, and although a computer might register a student's confused expression and recognize that the lesson pace might be too fast for this individual scholar, the computer would be unable to pinpoint what exactly the student fails to understand. Other events may be weighing down heavily on a student's mind, causing their face to contort and convey the emotions brought on from factors outside of the learning setting. A change in emotion not caused by a difficult lesson plan would cause the software to possibly alter the lesson pace when the student did not require any adjustment and ultimately generate frustration in the already distressed student.
Although each day, more and more opportunities to develop and improve technology and learning are created, sometimes these brilliant innovations do not mesh well with education. Despite the proposed effectiveness this software can serve for marketing companies, Facial Action Coding System would only produce obstacles to a student's learning process, ultimately diminishing any value it could potentially possess in a classroom. | 4 |
In my opinion im against driverless cars because not everyone is a bad driver , some people woud like to drive there own cars without anybody help or maybe people are causios of what they are doing . Driverless cars could be a good help but then again not everybody needs one . Some might like the driverless car and soe might not because what if the car your in messes up and spins out of control or crashes into something or someone . Then the person in the car wouldnt know what to do or how to react , driverless cars could be a positive thing and a negative like if someone was in a hurry and they needed to fix there hair or clothes while driving the car would come in handy or like i said if the car spins out of control or something , i dont think most people would like the driverless car if you ask me . Driverless cars might even cause more accidents not all cars work the same and one car might fail and cause a accident or someone getting hurt or even killed because of tecnology . i dont think all cars should be driverless some people might like to drive themselvs at there own pace and there own speed . | 1 |
Driverless cars are a huge advancement to our world. But the question is are they safe or not? I feel like the driverless cars are not safe for the world to use. Driverless cars can be extremely dangerous on roads because they are not smart of enough to detect non defensive drivers, drivers must be alert while in driverless cars, and lastly what if the driverless car malfunctions.
Driverless cars will not be able to recognize a non-defensive driver. The story says," Within 10 years, those sensors had become more advanced to detect and respond 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 response and control than a human driver could manage alone".
But what does the story say about drivers of other cars. Many drivers text and drive, blare music in the cars and not pay attention to the road, and usually most drivers aren't worried about the cars around them. This could costs people money for car wrecks but more importantly this could costs the people in driverless cars their lives.
Drivers of the driverless cars must be alert. What makes a driver alert? And is their a test to be proven if a driver is alert or not. The text states,"Some manufacturers hope to do that by bringing in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads-up displays. Such displays can be turned off instantly when the driver needs to take over—something not available to drivers trying to text with a cell phone". But what happens when these built in features don't alert the driver. They could recieve the alert and not be alerted. This could lead to terrible accidents and tragedy, including being serverely injured or even death.
Some may say that driverless cars will always do there job, that's why they are tested. But what happens when the car malfunctions out of no where? The brake stop working, or the steering wheel locks up and the car can no longer turn. This is a huge factor in deciding if driverless cars should even be allowed on the road. Think about how many cars are sent back to the manufacturer because of non working parts. This could easily happen to driverless cars or any cars so are they going to be safe on the road?
Driverless cars could actually change the world as we see it, making things easier for people and lowering the amount of attention needed on the road. But before considering buying one, make sure it is safe because they cannot detect non defensive drivers, the driver of the car must be alert, and lastly the car could malfunction. | 3 |
Dear state senator, I think that we should change to start voting by popular vote because it will be easier for the voters and is a more realistic way of voting.
When voting and following the rules of the electoral college, many voters get confused. As is says in source 2, many voters vote for the wrong person. They also don't always get controll over who they vote for. Say they voted for one canidate to be their state senator, well with that one person comes many people that have "pledged" themselves to that canidate. They would be voting for the canidate and these many people that have pledged themselves to him and they don't even know it.
Also as they say in source 2, the election of 2000 was a huge mishap in presidential election history. In states like Louisiana, they had people replace democratic electors so that the popular vote that would've went to one of the canidates, didn't actually go through. Although the electoral college is good for getting exact numbers and helps solve disputes( source 3)it is an uruly and untrustworthy way of voting and should not be used anymore. Voters are easily confused when voting and many do not follow up on what is happening during election time. I think that a better way to votee would be to vote more often and give the electors another chance to be relected so that after a few months if voters changed their mind then they could reelect someone else.
Popular vote is a much better idea not only becuase it is more realistic, but because it is easier to understand. Even some of our presidents like Richard Nixon and Bob Dole have thought that this was the way to go. Not only do they believe this, but they lost their presidency votes becuase of the electoral college. I think that they are just trying to scam voters and pick someone that would be best for them, not for our country. I think that by using the electoral college method, they are cheating into picking the winners, but if we used popular vote, this wouldnt happen.
Thank you for your time. | 3 |
Some people changed their views on the planet Mars in May, 2001 do you know why? Twenty five years ago NASA used their Viking 1 spacecraft to find a landing spot on Mars but, they found much more. Some people might think its aliens who made this forgein face figure on Mars, much like my family friend OTHER_PII. He believes that aliens live on mars but as a scientist at NASA I know there is no aliens on Mars and this is some natural cause. Here is what NASA's scientist have found out about this face like on Mars.
OTHER_PII told me "There are aliens on this planet." I know this is a natural cause for this face to appear like this. This is why im trying pursade him and tell him its "actually Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa". These landforms are commonly found in the American West. This one in pericular reminds Garvin "Of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho."
NASA has seen this kind of landform appear on Mars before. On April 8, 2001 with no clouds in the area Mars Global Surveyor got us a sencond look. OTHER_PII still thinks it is made from aliens though. Average for NASA's spacecrafts can go up to 43 meters, but this pixel went up to 1.56 meters. Many people still think this is alien made and we want to get as many as people we can to know the truth.
Some people might think different like OTHER_PII he states " How can this possibly be a landform like on earth but there is no earth like subtances on Mars?" He points out that other people think this way too. The picture was in magenizes and on posters in stores. Everyone got a good look at it and all of us think that it is becuase of aliens. How can a natural think on a planet make such a thing as a face. Others also might think that the photo was edited because they ddint see it in person but, OTHER_PII believes it is work of aliens.
OTHER_PII and the other people that think this about the Face on Mars is because aliens are incorrect. NASA has the facts and the oringal picture.This is for sure a landform made naturally and looks like a face. Every simple in the fact that this landform is not alien made. "Unmasking the Face on Mars" is just zooming up on the spacecraft and this is not made by aliens.
Reseach at NASA shows that this in not in fact "work of aliens". we have seen this before on this planet and we know what is caused from too. No, we have3 never seen a face show up as one of these landforms before but it is highly possible. This is why NASA states aliens did not do this and the photo was not editied. This photo shows a Martian landform and these landforms are on eath too. There are no aliens on earth it there? So how can these be from aliens, they are just landforms made naturally. This is in fact how OTHER_PII is incorrect and reseach showing the landform is natural is the real reason "There is a face on Mars." | 2 |
I believe that driverless cars should be developed. They would be able to help out in many ways. Some examples would be: less accidents, less confusion, and less deaths. And the cars would still have a driver inside to take charge just in case something goes wrong, so it isn't completley dependant on computer technology.
With the driverless cars, accidents would occur less frequently. Many accidents that happen are because of one of the drivers, whether it was because one of them was driving while intoxicated or too occupied with a text.The driverless cars wouldn't be distracted like that and would be a safer option. And even an accident in the road, such as a fallen tree, wouldn't be a problem. As stated in the article, the cars would have a lot of sensors to locate the accident and drive around it or avoid it.
Having a smart car would also be able to help with being lost or confused. If someone was new to a place they were unfamiliar with, they wouldn't have to worry not being able to find where they want to go. The car would be able to drive them there. And if someone were to get lost out away from civilization, the car would be able to get them back, as the sensors all over it would be able to reconize and retrace the steps to get back.
A driverless car would really be able to benefit our ecomony. The article even says that the cars would use less fuel than the taxis we have today, which means less money spent on fuel. With all of these positives, we should at least try out and see how these cars would work, and we may even start using them as our main transportation for getting around in the next 10 or so years. | 2 |
Dear State Senator,
Changing to election by popular vote for the president of the United States would be a better choice. Keeping Electoral College to me me would mean a crash in the system. Also when you vote you would not be voting for the president,but for a State of Electors, who in turn elect the president. In my opinion is one of these elections the Electoral College systems would crash due too the State Legislatures are responsible for picking the electors and those electors could always defy the will of the people. Plus the State of Electors have too much power thats horrible ,because if the State of Electors where to decides on another candiate there vote would count more than the people. Which would lead to the people to get angry because you voted and many other voted for the same one but it all comes down too what the State of Electors say. I'm not the only one that has this opinion. According to the a Gallup poll on 2000, taken shortly after Al Gore, won the popular vote but lost thepresidency. Over 60 percent of the voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have know. All we need State Senator is a good system because eventually this system that we have right know will eventualy crash. | 1 |
Student emotions can sometimes be hard to read. Students experience many different emotions everday throughout school. Some students may be happy and excited about school while others are bored and drowsy. New technology has been developed called the Facial Action Coding System. This system enables computers to indentify human emotions. This technology would be very benefiticial to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom.
With this new tech teachers would have the ability to read there students emotional expressions when they are giving a lesson. If the students emotional responses are boredom and drowsiness. Then the teacher will know they should change what they are doing so the students become more alert and interested."A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," Dr. Huang predicts. If a student is becoming lost or dosent understand the material the computer will recognize that and the teacher will be able to stop and help that student.
The use of this tech will allow teaching in the classroom to become more efficent and if a student is struggling teachers will be able to recognize that quicker. This system will not only help with teaching but can also help emotionally. If a student is sad and going through some difficult things the computer can recognize this by the students facial expressions. The teacher then can talk to the sutdent and maybe cheer them up.
This technology can also help with school safety. Recently there have been alot of school shootings and threats. If a student has a look on their face that shows anger,sadness,intent,or rage. The computer will recognize this and the teacher may be able to prevent anything bad from happening to that student or other people in general.
In conclusion the use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable in many different ways. It can make teaching more efficent. It can help teachers identify students who are lost or confused. It can recognize when a student is sad,mad,or angry therefore allowing the teacher the opportunity to speak with that student and see if they are ok. | 3 |
The development of driverless cars is a good thing. Driverless cars can and will play a huge factor in lowering accidents. Things like texting while driving, drinking while driving, and falling asleep while on the road can be avoided with a driverless car.
Texting while driving is a big issue in this genaration with the evolution of cell phones and such. There are lots of people texting and not paying attention to the road. With a driverless car that can be avoided if the car is on auto pilot while you awnser your important text. As stated the Google car can simply announce when the driver should be prepared to take over. This mean that there should be no reason while you should still have texting and driving accidents.
Drinking and driving is another thing that driverless cars can play a huge role in helping out with. There are alot more drunk driving incidents then anything so with a driverless car a person who is heavily intoxicated could not cause harm to other safe drivers. This is not an excuse however to get heavily drunk and intoxicated this is simply a safe measure incase that does end up happening the driverless cars can keep thoes who are responsible from not being hurt by you.
Falling asleep while on the road is another thing that a driverless car can help out with. While this is not a common accident it still happens alot. Some people have worked very long and hard shifts and are to tired to focus on the road leading to accidents. With the car on auto pilot you can catch up on some sleep while the auto pilot takes control.
In conclusion the driverless cars can and will be a big help on the road. They can prevent so many accidents from occuring and it is amazing how anyone can deny that. Sure there may be a few faults here and there but once everything is perfected driverless cars can potentially save life's on the road. | 3 |
A UFO lands in your front yard. Apart from the screaming, you hear beeps and boops. You turn to the side and see an Alien standing in your doorway. He opens his mouth and a loud alarm sound comes out. You open your eyes and then realize it was all a dream. That's the only reasonable explanation for you seeing a UFO or an alien. To this day scientist have not encountered signs of life on any other planet. So what makes you think aliens could have created the face on Mars?
Two decades and a half ago scientist discovered a face like shape on Mars. It was about two miles long. Scientist claimed it was staring at the cameras, but there was nothing surrounding it. No power tools, or hammers, not even a few sculpting tools. How would aliens create such a thing? With alien-y tools? Magic powers maybe? No, because it was a natural formation. Scientist figured out it was just another Martian mesa, which are frequent around the Cydonia. According to the article the only thing different about this one was that it "had unusual shawdows make it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh." Which made people go wild.
When Mars' face started its fifteen minutes of fame it became a beloved "pop icon." It was featured in movies, books, and radio talk shows. It "haunted grocery checkout lines" for years. That is when people, mostly conspiracy theorists, started thinking "What if aliens formed it?" Some scientist even started to believe that it was an alien artificat. So more research was done. Scientist took more pictures, which were ten times sharper than the first ones, and stutdied them. Discovering, the obivious, that it was a natural landform.
There was dissapointment all over the place, not only for the people, but scientist too. It was a mesa, a natural landform. It was even compared to the "MIddle Butte in the Snaler River Plain of Idaho". Since then the popularity of the face has gone downhill. Maybe one day it'll resurface on the social media as a funny meme that teens will talk about for two weeks. Tragic. | 2 |
Good Morning, the topic on today lesson would be how do the author support the idea of studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger in exploring Venus? However, we will find examples to support our claim by using deatils from the text. Lastly, we will discover more about Venus.
The author support the idea of studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger in exploring Venus by stating" How astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long ago, venus was probably covered largely coved with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth. The planet has a rocky sediment suface that includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. Furthermore, recall that venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary vistit, a crucial consideration given the long time frame of space travel. However, it states how in another project looking backinto technology called mechanical computers wasnt so great at the beganning but as year went on the U.S.A develop in new technology which give people the chance to go out of space to explore the planets.
Lastly,I can support my claim by say that the title " The challenge of exploring Venus are least because we have better enquitment the would give us an better chance in not getting hurt or stuck on the planet ; so the author support the idea of studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger in exploring Venus by stating that with better tools that can help the rocket take all the pressure, heat,and other forces that comes with going outta space adn all this comes in play wiht having better explorement with less deaths and other causes that could happen while taking that journey. | 1 |
Car usage in the United States has gone down by nine percent since 2005. But we are not the only ones who have limited ourselves to decrease air pollution. Large cities around the world like Paris and Vauban have insistuted car free days to help keep the air clean. Carpooling or even riding a bicycle has become more and more popular. People are no longer desiring to live in suburban areas, they want to be near the city. They are becoming more active and less stressed. Limited car usage has caused people venture away from their normal actvities and try new things.
Driving deprives you of the beauty of civilization. Weather it be that your missing the lights and crowded sidewalks full of random people in a huge city or small town full of trees and land marks, you are missin tout. You can not enjoy the air and sounds or all of the sights in your car through the windows. One Columbian ,Carlos Arturo, states that car free days are a good opportunity to take away stress. Taking a breahe of fresh air every now and again is exremely nessicary but we what will we do when we have polluted the air so much that there is no more fresh air left to take in?
Limited car usage would also encorage people to be more active. They would have to walk eberywhere they wanted to go. This would possibly decrease America's obesity rates.
"Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city," is says in paragraph 28 of source three: Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota. Having a healthy nation would help with so much more than anone could imagine. | 2 |
The chance that computers would have the ability to fully communicate and understand humans or understansing facial expression has both positive and negative effects in different situations. Some people are unable to transfer their thoughts into the right words to explain how theyre feeling then it would be a positive effect on letting people know how to communicate with them in a way that suits their mood. There are some people that maybe dont want to be read and evaluated by a computer though this is where it would be a negative effect because people should have their own privacy and if they want to look happy but actually be sad then thats just them as who they are and how they handle their feelings how could an evaluation fully understand whats going on the inside someones brain anyway, i dont think peoples privacy should be taken from this new technology. So my claim on this article would be against the new technology to read students' emotional expression im not for it just because in the article it says how their facial expressions are that is how theyre feeling when possibly there's something completly opposite going on in their mind. | 1 |
The Face on mars is just a natural landform. any scientist believe it was created by aliens, but i feel like its just a normal landform. To prove that it is a natural landform and not built by position of mars, erosion, and time change.
The position of the planet can also be the reason why the rock looks like a face. In paragraph 2, it says that the rock did have shadoes that could give anillusion of eyes, mouth, and a nose. In paragraph 8, It gives the season which caused clouds. Clouds are one of many reasons that causes shadows. These clouds could of ben in a cerrtain position that gave "The Face" illusions.
A possible explanation that the face is just a natural landform is erosion. In paragraph 8, it states that . Mars experienced a vey cloudy time. As known that clouds can form rain and/or wind which can be used to wither ddown rocks. Wind on Mars could be harsh and putting a lot of pressure aganst a giant rock causeing it to make indents. These indents can be seen as eyes, mouth, or even a nose.
As you see in the pictures that were taken by Viking 1, over the time period the face began to dissapear. In the pre-story,
"The Face" was hand made by an alien then wouldn't you think that they would keep itin good condition . Instead "The Face"
deformed over the time. Just like on earth, rocks break down over time.
There are many factors that can be said to prove that "The Face" is just a natural landform.
Even an website like the one in paragraph 7, can state that it was just a nateral landform. With enough evidence you can prove that it was indeed a natural landform. | 2 |
Hello Mr. Senator,
I was writting to inform you about a topic that has been talked about for the past year, the Electoral Collage. This process has its pros and cons, but i'm more in the con side; you see the reason why the Electoral College needs to be abolished is because people dont really get to choose who their president is, the people who choose the president are the people in the Electoral College. How the Electoral College works is the state has electors and those electors have to be won by the president for the president to have how many electoral votes he gets from that state depending on how many electors that state has. The trick here is that sometimes the electors can deny the will of the people since the election is based on electoral votes not on popular votes, don't get me wrong people's votes do influence electors in deciding which president won their votes. Overall the electoral college is unfair to everyone because of the winner-take-all system in each state, candidates dont spend time in states that they have no chance winning over so they got to the "swing" states since they have more chance of winning them over depending on their campaing. I don't think we should be trusting people to vote for us because as we have seen some electors vote for the candidate they want to win and not the candidate their state wants to win. Thats my rant about the Electoral College and I hope it makes you see clearer.
Best Regards, Alberto | 2 |
In this article of "Making Mona Lisa Smile" it talks about how a facial recognition software can detect your mood. It is brough up in paragraph six that this software should be introduced into classrooms. Classrooms are already getting technologically advanced and are gaining more expenses from this as well. Adding Facial Action Coding Systems to students' computers will just add unwanted price increases, pointless space takeup, and more complexity to computers in our classrooms.
Adding this Facial Action Coding System (FACS) will just add on to the expenses that schools are already putting into place just to add on to the technology that people are trying to push into schools. If a school of lower income tries pushing this system, taxes and school payments will be greatly increased on parents that might not even want this system at all. Although richer schools may be able to afford this software, it will definitely take money away from sections of the school that actually might need attention such as athletics or even music and art classes. Money saved from not buying a software that is just a want and not a need can fork money over to parts of schools that actually need the money. This software is not a necessity and if bought, can take away money from areas that need attention. Not only is the price not needed to be added to, but this software may not even help students in the classroom.
Students in schools with enough money to give students their own laptops usually have used a lot of money on these already expensive devices. Laptops in schools are most usually used to help students who are sick at home to stay connected to their teachers to get assignments. Other uses for the laptops range from eliminating paper and also researching. The FACS software just adds another layer of complexity to the laptops. In paragraph six, the author talks about how the software can see your reaction to ads on screens and adjust new ads to this facial expression. Not only can you be frowning for other reasons than your computer, but if you are doing schoolwork, why does it matter if you are mad or happy? Laptops are to get work done and get through school to help you research and understand topics more. Laptops are not for fun but are tools to help you succeed in school by helping you learn topics applied by the teachers. This software could be extremely helpful at home, but at school it just makes the laptops more complex than they need to be.
If a laptop is being used in school, it is being used as a tool to eliminate paper and help teachers connect to students on a higher level. These laptops are already complex enough to have several tabs at once, documents eliminating paper usage, and also have online textbooks. Some students who are not very educated in technology may see some information gathered and used by laptops to seem very confusing and maybe even frightening. Adding this FACS to laptops at schools will just change how students are seeing their laptops and can be switched around by students making faces at it. If a student is very sad and looks at the computer, it may make things happier and more colorful, but what happens when somebody is very happy? Will the computer turn dark and very bland to make them sad? The software will add another layer to these already complex devices that is not needed. The software may be a want in the eyes of people trying to make school more enjoyable, but this software is merely useless in connection to learning experience. Even with all of these negatives, there are some positives in that some genuinely sad individuals using this software can be cheered up and will actually begin to pay attention to their screens. This software has many negatives but at the same time might actually be used for good in schools that can afford it and still have money left over.
All in all, this software may be helpful to those outside of classrooms, but in reality it may be too expensive for some to implement into these already expensive devices. FACS at its worst will be a price increase, an unneeded software, and a system that will add complexity to these laptops. But, FACS at its best can greatly increase moods of poeple who have acquired this software in hopes of it increasing moods and helping students focus. This software should be relatively unexpensive which will give schools the ability to talk to families about implementing this software into laptops to help students learn. If a school can afford this software and it is approved by families, this definitely can help students focus unless this is too expensive for schools but is added anyways. To conclude, this software is somewhat useless in a way but it is completely up to the school corporation and the families of the school to decided if this should be implemented into our daily lives. | 4 |
The Electoral College was a system thought up by people who lived in a time much different than our own. And in that time, it made sense. It made sure that those who cast their state's votes for president, the electors, were well informed on the issues and the stance of the candidates for those issues. However, now that everyone has access to a wealth of information through the internet, newspapers and television, this is no longer a problem; this is why election by popular vote would be a better system.
With the Electoral College, voters don't have a direct say on who becomes president. They have to trust their votes in the hands of people they don't even know. People who could cast their state's votes for any candidate they want. This system is completely unnecessary now that citizens have a wealth of information about the candidates and their stance on certain topics.
If our nation switched to election by popular vote, everyone's vote would matter. In the Electoral College system, many people in states that are decisively one way or the other, don't vote, knowing that the overwhelming majority of the population of their state is against them. This makes certain people, like Democrats in Texas or Republicans in California, feel that their vote has no power. In an election by popular vote however, every vote matters because the people's votes directly decide the president.
Our Founding Fathers were geniuses to have come up with a system that worked so well in their time, however, old methods don't always stand the test of time. Election by popular vote makes more sense in today's world. The Electoral College eliminates the power of some people's votes and puts those that matter in the hands of people who could do whatever they want with them. This is why election by popular vote would be a better system for determining the president than the Electoral College. | 3 |
The electoral college is a time worn system. Some people hate it, others defend it to their dying breath. The electoral college is no longer a good way to select our nations' leader because the power no longer rests with the people.
Through the electoral college system, we put our votes into the trust of strangers who may or may not decide to vote how they want and completely disregard our voices. Plus with all of the corruption in government as it is, it wouldn't be the most difficult thing to buy a voter off and potentially change the outcome of the election. Or the electoral college voters could end up clueless or untrustworthy, as Bradford Plumer, Source 2, paragraph 10, points out: "Can voters always control whom their electors vote for? Not always. Do voters sometimes get confused about the electors and vote for the wrong candidate? Sometimes.", proving the point that the people are not in control.
Granted there are a few small benefits to the electoral college. It usually prevents the confusion of ties inside states, and, as Source 3, paragragh 20, Richard A. Posner says, " Voters in toss-up states are more likely to pay close attention to the campaignto really listen to the competing candidatesknowing that they are going to decide the election. They are likely to be the most thoughtful voters, on average, and the most thoughtful voters should be the ones to decide the election."
The problem with the overwhelming power given to the swing states by the electoral college is that it does not represent the American idea: that no one group of people is in control, that everybody has an equal say in the matter. When a state like California votes for a candidate, that candidate immediately has an advantage from the start. And all the people in California who voted for the other candidate are not heard at all.
Corruption is, again, a major problem with most politics, including the electoral college. In 1960, segregationists nearly replaced all of the democratic electoral voters in Louisiana with voters who would instead oppose John F. Kennedy, and potentially cost him the election. But while a small group of people can be bought off and turned to vote against the majority, it is impossible to corrupt the American people. It would also cause candidates to have to pay more attention to the smaller states and the states that the candidate thinks they will win over automatically due to their current party.
The American people need the power to elect their leader back in their hands again. The electoral college was a good system years ago, but with time comes change. | 3 |
The challenge of Venus. Venus is sometimes called the evening star why because it's one of the brightest points of light in the night time. The nickname evening star is misleading because Venus is planet its the secound planet of the sun. Venus is a worthy pursuit. Venus is planet not a star it the secound planet of the sun.
Venus is a planet. Venus is often referred as Earth's twin Venus is the closest planet to Earth terms of density and size. Venus is occasionally the closest in distance to Earth. The diffrences of Venus is the speed sometimes we are closer to Mars then Venus because Venus is right around the coner and they have sent many spacecraft to land but not many have lasted a few hours. Venus is referred as Earth's twin planet and closest to Earth.
A thick atmosphere of 97 percent of carbon dioxide blankets Venus. On planet's surface the average temperatures is 800 degress Fahrenheit and the pressure of the atmospheric is 90 times greater what we experience on our planent. Venus has the hottest temperature of any planet in our solar system. Venus is blanket by a 97 percent of carbon dioxide and has the hottest temperature of any planet in solar system.
Scientists are discussing further visits to its surface. Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because its was once most like planet in our sytem. Venus can probably could been covered by a ocean and could supported various forms of life. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration has been sending people to study Venus. Scientists still discuses about futher visits and NASA has send people to study venus.
The author suggests that studying Venus is dangers yes he's right because Venus is one of the hottest planet even though Mercury is closer to our sun beyond the high pressure and heat Veusian weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes. So yes its dangers studying Venus many space craft haven't lasted hours in venus. | 1 |
In today's modern world, new inventions are shaping our daily lifestyle. Cellphones took over meeting personally, calculators took over long divison, and cars took over walking from point A to point B. No one really thought how dependant our world would be on this new-age technologies. Our ancestors certainly didn't have the latest smartphone or a brand new Mercedes in their driveway. So what made our generation so materialistic? The necessity of a brand new car, (or any car for that matter) is slowly diminishing, and more people are getting back to using other forms of transportation. The limiting use of cars is super beneficial to the environment, your family's budget, and can bring better social opportunities.
The use of cars has both positive and negative effects. Car usage has a massive impact on the environment, not just in your community, but worldwide. As we all know, global warming is an international phenomenon that is nipping at our toes. It is (mostly) caused by pollution and the dissolvement of the ozone layer, which protects our atmosphere. Gas emissions from tailpipes cause a great amount of greenhouse gases to disperse. In Europe, "cars are responsible for 12% of greenhouse gas emissions" (Elizabeth Rosenthal: Source 1). In the United States, the grenhouse gas emissions are 50% caused by passenger cars (Rosenthal; Source 1). That means everytime you get into your car for a "cruise", you are harming our environment. Trapped car emmisions combine with the warm weather layers in the air to form smog, which is greatly affecting the French capital, and Beijing (source 2: Duffer). To help prevent these emissions from getting worse, or causing greater harm to our environment, some cities have started a "car-free zone", in which no one is allowed to own cars or use them and even park them in their driveway! (source 1: Rosenthal). By creating or participating in a limiting use of cars you can help preserve our beloved Mother Earth.
Every 16-year old dreams of waking up to their brand-new car waiting for them in the driveway. But demographic studies recently show that "there has been a large drop in the percentage of 16-39 year olds getting licenses." (source 4: Rosenthal). This decrease is proof that less and less people are interested in owning cars, and even worse, driving them. This doesn't seem like a bad idea, due to the fact that the limited use of cars can save you and your family a great deal of money. New cars are approximately ranging from $25,000 to $50,000, with a monthly payment of about $350. A gallon of gas usually lasts about a week and a half and costs an average of $40 to fill up. In a month, a typical family spends approximately $400 a month solely on car expenses. By choosing to involove yourself in "smart planning", which is the seperation of suburban life from auto use (Source 1: Rosenthal) or by using other means of transportation like public buses, trains, bikes, and the sharing of taxis, your household can save a good amount of money.
In modern families, not only has the over-use of technology/social media taken over the traditional family interaction, but also the over-use of cars. In most households, where the teenager has a vehicle, he/she mobilizes themselves away and out with friends. Everyone ends up in different parts of the town, the mall, a restaurant, or at home. If the use of cars is limited, either in a town like Vauban (Germany), where no one uses cars, or in a city like Bogota (Colombia), where families use multiple seat bicycles to visit parks and spend time together (source 3:Selsky), your family can make up for lost time and completely forget about going off on their own. Not only will the days without cars benefit your family but also your social life! A date to bike-tour the city at night is much more enticing and luring then a plain date to the movies. If you need a car, for any reason, whether it be work, or vacation, rental car services are a much better and cheaper option then using your own car.
The innovative programs like "Smart Planning", discussed in
"In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars"
, and the "Day without cars" celebrated in many Colombian cities like Bogota and Cali, discussed in Andrew Selsky's
"Car-Free Day is Spinning into a Big Hit in Bogota"
can provide a interactive and enjoyable lifestyle without the hassle and stress of cars. Not only will your family's social life benefit but also your household's economy! The limiting use of cars can help you or anyone save money without paying those hefty monthly bills, as implied in Source 4:
"The End of Car Culture"
. Last but certainly not least, by reducing your car dependancy, you can help protect the environment by stopping the greenhouse gas emissions from your vehicle, as explained in Source 2:
"Paris Bans Driving Due to Smog"
. Overall, the limited use of cars is beneficial in numerous ways, and hopefully will be exercised much more. | 4 |
It could be of good use. For example say you have a student that isnt having a good week. Lets say you cant fully tell if they are in a good or bad mood right. You could just bring the "FACS" Machinery and let that be the judge. We could also say that there are people who know how to hide emotions physically. So looking at them might let you think they are happy but really they are sad, lonely, depressed, ect. That would be another good momment for that to be there. To let you know how the person is really feeling.
There are both pros and cons to having this machine ill go over the pros first. Some pros are that you will be able to tell someones mood. Aswell as that you will be able to tell if someone is lying about there true feelings which could really be a problem when it comes to things like depression leading to suicides and things. Finally being able to know someones emotions could work to your favor as a teacher say someone is confused but to shy or scared to ask. Use the "FACS" machine to get them out of there. Some cons would be things like it could take priceless time out of your teaching to use the machine. They didnt give a estimate of how long it takes but i'd expect it to be a pretty long time. Also it could take a big price hit on the schools around the nation, I couldnt imagine this being a cheap device. Finally it could be useless. Some teachers wont take time out of their class to use it because frankly they just dont/wont care. Which would be a total bust seeing that the school would waste so much money just for it to go to waste.
I honestly think its amazing how someone can tell you how they are feeling at that moment. The diversity must be off the walls. it must be 1 in a million to get the same feeling. Its crazy the things we can do now a days with technology. People are coming up with more and more ways to initiate a more satisfactory lifestyle. Its always good to see someone take that inititive and start something like this. Seeing this I wonder what could be next. | 2 |
Today's world contains greater technology than ever before, and it continues to become more advanced. Just one example of this technology is emotion recognition technology in which a computer can identify one's emotions from only his face. For example, Thomas Huang used this Facial Action Coding System to read the emotions of Mona Lisa, a famous painting by Leonardo da Vinci. Experts are beginning to realize that this technology, Facial Action Coding System, could result in great advancements in the classroom. But will it really have great benefits in the classroom? I believe that there could be some tremendous problems with this new technology; but if it is used properly, it could have far greater results. Although there are some dangers involved, the Facial Action Coding System has great potential value for the classroom.
The Facial Action Coding System could become a valuable tool someday in classrooms around the globe. But before looking at the great value that this tool could potentially bring, we must look at the harm that it could cause. One-on-one individual contact is vital to a child's education. Whether at home or in a classroom, a student needs an individual present in order to best teach him the concepts necessary for learning. If the computer begins to replace the teacher, then this Facial Action Coding System is no longer a benefit to the student, but rather a harm. On the bright side, however, the Facial Action Coding System does bring large benefits. Most importantly, it engages the student. Doctor Huang, innovator of this Facial Action Coding System said that, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." It would then recognize that it needed to better explain the topic or rather grab the learner's attention. This could greatly benefit the academic world. Students could be taught individually, at their own pace, and possibly even in their own way. Those more advanced could move on to more advanced subjects, while those struggling could receive the help they need.
Facial Action Coding System, a wonder to us all, could greatly affect today's world, but it must be used with wisdom. It does not replace the teacher, but rather aids the teacher in teaching. Teachers are still tremendously needed for our students, and their personal mentoring is still of priceless value. Yet, along with these great blessings, the Facial Action Coding System could be added to better improve our academic world. The world needs educated men and women, and this Facial Action Coding System, innovated by Professor Thomas Huang, could be the exact element needed better educate our students, and make for a brighter future. | 3 |
I think that the development should happen because it can be easier to drive. Also i think it can prevent less accidents and save lives. For example, sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individial wheels and reduce power from the engine, allowing far better response and control than a human driver could ever manage alone.
Also, the development should happen because it can be very hepful. For example, In 2013, BMW announced the development of "Traffic Jam Assistant". 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. In fact, none of the cars developed so far are completely driverless.
My last reason to have the development is sensors and computer hardware and software to make driving safer are also leading cars that can handle more and more driving tasks on their on. Also antilock brakes and driver assistance still seem a long way from the dream of calling a driverless cab to take us take us wherever we desire. | 0 |
The Seagoing Cowboys is a program that people recommend you join and this is why. Luke Bomberger is trying to convince others to join the Seagoing Program because you get to help peolpe in need,experience new things,and visit tourist sites in different areas.
First,you should join this because you get to help peolpe in need. Luke helped people after World War II was over in Europe recover their food supplies, animals,and much more. Another way that he helped is he took care of people's horses,young cows,and mules that were shipped overseas by himself.
Secondly, you can experience new things. Luke first took care of the animals on a ship and after that he was a night watchman. On the boat he got to play baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed with the cowboys. He also got to do table-tennis tournaments, boxing, fencing, reading, whittling, and other games.
Lastly,you an visit tourist sites. Luke got to visit an excavated castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal on his way to China. He also got to take a gondola ride in Venice,Italy. Lastly,on his way he got to see the Acropolis in Greece.
Now you can see why you should join the Seagoing Cowboys. From helping people in need, experiencing new things, to visiting tourist sites. Now you know what program you can join after hgih school, in the future. | 2 |
In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile," the author describes how a new technology called the Facial Action Coding System enables computers to identify human emotions. This system has changed the Mona Lisa painting. It has made her smile. It detected that she had a sad emotion and changed it to a smile. Now the question is; should we use this on students in a classroom? This could actually tell teachers of how their students emotions are, because sometime you can't tell someone's emotions.
I don't think we should use this in classrooms on students. I think it would waste valuable time for the teacher to actually teach. Many people like to hide their emotions. The article made a statement about your smile. " They even indicate the difference between a genuine smile and a forced one." Sometimes you feel the need to force a smile. You do it because you know it's the right thing to do. If we detect that that was a false emotion, then it could make many people fell very upset. It could also have many advantages too. It could let the teacher know how students emotions change from a different type of lesson. Maybe the students are more actice to participate during a different type of lesson, so that the teacher knows which way is the best to teach. The Facial Action Coding System has its advantages ,but could also lead to many disadvantages.
The Facial Action Coding System is great piece of technology. I don't think it would be something that is used very much. Dr. Huang said that, "even though individuals often show varying degrees of expression" (like not smiling as broadly). Using video imagery, the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movements. The technology invloved in this system is amazing, I just don't think many people would actually take the time to use it. | 2 |
Google Recently came out with Google cars Or smart cars, Cars that can drive themselves. A few negative aspects are that These cars can crash easily if not used properly
These cars tend to vibrate when backing into an object so they can be a bit hazordous. Many of these cas can be explained to cause numerous amounts of crashings and such so people need to be aware that these cars aren't very good or as you could say that professional, So people should start looking at using normal everyday cars rather than Smart cars because you never know what could happen with cars like this. Many people believe that this car will be easy because you could sit back relax and text or watch Netflix but the cars may not be that Well and Improved so you never know what could happen so you would still have to watch out for other Vehicles, Animals ,Humans Etc.
So what i'm saying is if you get a google car chances are you may not be as impressed as you think so be careful on what decisions you make. | 1 |
This technology can be helpful and valuable to students in the classroom. Students can use this technology to learn new things about human emtion and how different muscle groups help with aiding showing the emotion.
In the passage Dr. Huang explains how Da Vinci studied human anatomy to precisely paint the facial expression of the Mona Lisa to to show what emotion she is displaying or feeling. Huang also explains if you physically make a certain face to display a certain emotion that you will actually feel that emotion. Technology like this can also help make more detailed and expressive face for either video games or for video surgeries.
This form of technology has countless uses in either the classroom and even more types of jobs and sciences. Being able to teach hman emtion in a hands on way will help with making people and students understand what basic human emtions and how certain muscle groups help in with physically showing these these emtions and how they can be better understood. | 1 |
Many people are wondering why more researchers are concerned about rising carbon emissions around the globe. Carbon emissions are gases that are released into the atmosphere by transportation and other types of industrial manufacturing. Lately, there has been a change evolving in different areas as supported by each source, that is moving toward "[car- free cities]". However, most citizens are also wondering what are the advantages of limiting their car usage, and how will it effect the life around their community; There have been ways of doing this as stated in these sources.
In source 1:
In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars , by Elisabeth Rosenthal, it explains how in "Vauban, Germany, the residents of this upscale community are suburban pioneers, going where few... [people] have gone before: they have given up their cars" (paragraph 1).
The statistics show that "[a]s a result, 70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold a car to move here"[:] to limit car usage. As it seems economically and environmentally effiecient, people such as Heidrum Walter feel "when I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way" (paragraph 3). The people in this area have noticed that " all of [their] development since World War II has been centered on the car, and that will have to change, said by David Goldberg, an official of Transportation for America, a fast-growing coalition of hundreds of groups in the United States..." (paragraph 7).
Comporable to source 1, source 2:
Paris bans driving due to smog , by Robert Duffer, states that "after days of near- record pollution, Paris [had] enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city" (paragraph 10). People were "ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22- euro fine ($31), (paragraph 11), and "[a]lmost 4,000 drivers were fined, according to Reuters- an international news agency headquartered in London" (paragraph 12). Most believed that it was a rivalry between Paris, France and "Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world" (paragraph 14).
Because of the tremendous fog, "[d]elivery companies complained of lost revenue, while exceptions were made for plug- in cars, hybrids, and cars carrying [several] passengers. Also, [p]ublic transit was free of charge from Friday to Monday, according to the BBC (paragrpah 18).
Source 3:
Car- free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota , by Andrew Selsky, states that in Bogota, Colombia "a program that's set to spread to other countries, millions of Colombials hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during a car- free day..." (paragraph 20).
They participated in this special occasion consecutively for three years, banning cars, but allowing taxi cabs, and buses for the "Day Without Cars" in the captial city; This promoted other transportation methods, while reducing smog output. Any people who violated this day were issued " $25 fines" (paragraph 21). Businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza said, "[i]t's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution, as he rode a two- seat bicycle with his wife" (paragraph 24). "[This] day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in Bogota in the mid- 1990s" (paragraph 27). "Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city..." (paragraph 28).
Source 4:
The End of Car Culture , (another article) by Elisabeth Rosenthal, provides more information towards this evolving movement nationwide. Not only is change occuring in the previous countries described, but the United States has started to be part of the change. "... [G]oals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions..., will get a fortuitous assist from an incipient shift in American behavior..." (paragraph 29).
Numerous researchers are contemplating "a fundamental question: Has America passed peak driving?" (paragraph 30). Over the years the United States of America has gained notoriety for "its broad expanses and suburban ideals, [which has] long been one of the world's prime car cultures. Over the years, there has been an assembly line in Detroit, Michigan during the '40s- '60s and the "Model T" gave Americans the way to take a spin in "Mustang Sally" during the "Midnight Hour", while listening to Wilson Pickett (paragraph 31).
Overall, most countries including America, have seen changes in their economy. [T]he number of miles driven in 2005 dropped..." and the unemployed weren't going to work anyway, [b]ut by many measures the decrease in driving preceded the downturn and appears to be persisting now that recovery is under way" (paragraph 32). Rosenthal states that there was a recession, and that the unemployed weren't working, but regardless, the people that were working still couldn't dodge the recession, which ultimately impacted not only the Automotive Industry, but everything else. Car companies like Ford and Mercedes rebranded their businesses (around the world, as it is Ford is an American car and Mercedes is a German car) (paragraph 32).
"Many sociologists believe it will- it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment, since transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions, just behind power plants" (paragraph 34). One thing that most of these people can agree on is that [d]ifferent things are converging which suggest that we are witnessing a long- term cultural shift..." (paragraph 35). All of this information can help lead citizens to new cures for shifting this change on the right universal pathway to preserving the atmosphere, ridding us of Global Warming and Greenhouse gas effects. | 2 |
I believe that there are some ups and some downs to the development of making these computerized cars, because Like the article saysif there was an accident, then whose fault would it be. The article also says that why would anyone want a driveless car, but they still have to drive. This makes no sense because if you have a driveless car, then you shouldn't have to still drive.
Having a driveless car, should mean that no matter what all you should have to do is sit the the car, and just be driven where it is that you want to go. Even though the assist is very helpful, having a driveless car is a little to much. It seems as though you would have to put more time into worrying about if your going to have to drive now, or in the next five minutes. That's a lot of stress. Having a driveless car would use more fuel than just calling a taxi cab.
It doesn't make sense that the drive should have to drive half of the way and then the car just takes over. There are some perks to having a car that can drive itself, but then again say you just got off of work, your tired ok yes, you
can let the car drive, but what if the car doesn't want to drive anymore, then you have to come out of your comfortable spot and drive. This is not right, we should just keep the cars that we have now. It seems like they are a lot less trouble, and they get you where you need to go in the time that you need to be there in. There was really no point in making the driveless car, if you still have to do everything that you have to do, when your just
driving yourself.
Driveless cars are very dangerous, because you don't know when you might get into an accident, and then you have a car driving you. You never know when the car's parts might stop working, and it doesn't tell you that you have roadblock up ahead, or that you may have to come to a sudden stop. The idea of having a driveless car, is a good idea, even you though you may have to do everything that you would have to do if
you are driving the car.
I believe that having a driveless car is very dangerous, it's not alwayts going to be reliable, and you can hurt yourself with this car. It's assist can stop working. It may give up on you one day. The down fall about having
a selfdriving car too, is that no matter if you have an accident or not, it still may
become said to be your fault. | 2 |
"What have Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO all, in their time, agreed on? Answer: Abolishing the electoral college!" Many people are not very fond of the electoral college for several reasons. For example, voters do not even vote for the president but for the electors, when there is a tie the election is given to the House of Representatives, where state delegations vote on the president. Also, some may say that the single best argument against the electoral college is what we might call the disaster factor.
Changing to election by popular vote for the president of the United States would be a better solution. Many people would also be in favor of this. The electoral college is not liked by many people, but there are people who are in favor with voting that way. There is a very slim chance by voting with popular vote will not wind up ending in a tie, or blaming the electors for the cause of the president. But, the electoral college is also very helpful when it comes down to the presidential election. They obviously know what they are doing, where as many people in the United States might be voting at random, they might not even care who their leader of our country is.
Many say that the electoral college is unfair to voters. The winner-take-all system is in each state, and candidates do not spend time in states they know have a chance at winning. Candidates mainly focus on the tight races in "swing" states. But, there are likely more thoughtful voters in toss-up states that are more likely to pay close attention. Yes, I do believe that the most thoughtful voters should be the ones to decide the election, but it isn't the voters who are voting? It all comes down to the electoral college doesn't it?
All in all, changing the voting system to where the electoral college is not as involved in deciding our president would be a better solution. Bradford Plumer said, "It's official: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational." The arguments against direct elections are very high. So, what do you think? Should the electoral college continue get to have a major say on who our president is, or should the people have more of a say in this chaos. | 2 |
"Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent to greenhouse gass emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent...in the United States", with statistics like these it is important that we learn ways we can lower car usage and simultaniously better our lives.
By reducing car usage, we could lower the effect of greenhouse gases that are one of the most threatning forces to life on earth. If the current polution of air continues, the ice caps will melt causing global flooding eliminating land that is needed for sustaining life. one of the ways t stop this is lower car usage and use cleaner forms of public transportation.
Another benefit of reducing car usage is a better sense of community because things will have to be closer together. People will improve social interaction make more friends and lead happier lives. "When I had a car, I was always tense. I'm much happier this way". This excerpt shows that people are much happier without having a car and just using bicylces and public transportaton to carry out their lives.
People all over the world have stopped driving cars to reduce smog an promote better ways of transportation that are much more advantagous then driving a car. Will you join them? | 2 |
In the passage "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author claims that though Venus's conditions are to extream for that of a human it is still good to study and explore the planet! and says the "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well oce have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system."
The author says the Venus has many geological Earth like structures such as Valleys, Moutans, craters ect... and that Venus can sometimes be the nearest option for a planetary visit. which is very true and may provide insite to what may oneday happen to our own planet known as Earth, NASA is even looking into it and has already figured out that staying a little over 30 miles above the surface of Venus a human given the right equitment may be survivable though it will not be easy!
So in conclusion yes I do think that it is reasonable to resurch Venus and continue to study it would be a worthy persute dispite the dangers it brings because we will never see infinity, but we can choose to dream byond. | 1 |
The future of cars are always going to get better and better but driverless cars? That would be a huge jump to the future. Driverless cars are being worked on in this year. These cars will change the way we drive. Driverless cars are going to make driving easyer, safer, and more helpful
Driverless cars can help us humans by making driving easy. For Example, If you wanna go to the mall,your driverless car can take you there without a problem. Another Example is that a truck driver can get across the states way easyer. The truck driver has nothing to do but keep his eyes on the road. Wow super easy!
Driverless cars can also be much safer then a real person driving. A examble, is that your tierd after a hard match of friday night football with your team and your left arm is hurting but you still have to drive home you could crash because of the left arm. If you had a driverless car you could get home worry free. A driver less car can make the trip a lot safer.
Driverless cars can helpful in your driving life. An examble, of this well be if a pregent women is at home alone without a phone and her water broke she could use her driverless car to take her to the hospital. What happens if your on the phone with sombody because its really inportant but your driving and then you wreak. If you had a driverless car you could be on that phone as long as you want.
In conclusion driverless cars well inprove the future. The Driverless cars will make driving easyer, safer, And helpful. so lets wait for these great cars to reach the market. | 1 |
I am for the development of driverless cars. In the article, more good than harm comes from these cars. It can make driving safer and easier on the people. There are few problems, and the problems that exist can be fixed with the advancement of technology. In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author uses deatil to describe why smart cars, or cars that don't necessitate a driver, are a good thing.
If driver less cars become a thing then the earth becomes cleaner. In paragraph one the author states, "The cars he forsees would use half the fuel of today's taxi system." Making smart cars the smarter option for more reasons than just transportation. Also in paragraph 8 the author tells the reader that BMW is trying to make driving fun. The author explains, "Some manufacturers hope to do that by bringin in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads up displays." This means that driving wouldn't become boring, but actually more enjoyable than it already is. Driverless cars are just the way to go.
In pargraphs 9 and 10 the author discusses the traffic laws that may need to be put in place, if these cars become a popular thing. And yes, with the development of these cars there does come some problems and situations, but the advantages truly do outway the negatives. If driverless car do become a thing, and their technology truly is advanced, then multiple car related incidents would stop happening. Drunk driving would cease, because the cars either wouldn't let the driver drive, or the driver wouldn't have to and the car would do it for them. Also car crashes may slow down. If cars run by themsleves then when with other cars they'll become unifomr and not run into eachother. Driverless cars are safer and more reliable than normal cars.
Smart/Driverless cars are safer and more reliable than regular cars. They provide less chance of human error like car accidents and drunkness. Plus they would be more entertaining than normal cars. n the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author uses deatil to describe why smart cars, or cars that don't necessitate a driver, are a good thing. That is why the development of smart cars is a good thing. | 3 |
In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming", it has driven me to say that I am all for driverless cars. Using details from the article I can tell you exactly why. I think it is very helpful to people who could use it. Driverless cars would have to create new laws, but then again they would be helpful. Technology is coming far in this world, driverless are only the beginning.
My position on driverless cars are that I'm all for it. I believe that they would come in handy in the future. Even, if they are assisting you , who can't use a little extra assisting? The article says, " The most important bit of technology in this system is the spinning sensor on the roof. Dubbed LIDAR, it uses laser beams to form constantly updating 3-D model of the car's surroundings. The combination of all this input is necessary for the driverless car to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel." (stated in paragraph 4). Having that there to help you, would be so helpful and useful.
Having a driverless car would be so helpful in many different and wonderful ways. As I mentioned in the last paragraph it's laser beams surroundings of the car. Not only that but, "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." , also, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves."(both stated in paragraph 7). Those are two of the many ways that driverless cars are very helpful.
With new cars come new laws, and with these new laws come safer roads. Some new laws would have to be laws that cover liability in accidenys because who's fault would it really be? In paragraph 9 it states, " If technology fails and someone is injured who is at fault-the driver or the manufacturer?", and they have a good point, but it would automatically be the manufacturer because the driver does not have full control over the car. The article also states, "Presently, traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times", which is why they wouldnt know who's fault it would be. Therefore, the laws they crete are only meant to keep people safe.
Coming to a conclusion, I still believe that driverless cars are very helpful to people who could use them. Despite creating new laws, they are very helpful to keeping people safer aswell. The driverless cars are very helpful and wonderful in many and different ways. In my opinion, driverless cars could possibly help the world in ways you wouldn't even think they could. Technology is coming far in this world, Driverless cars would only be the beginning. | 2 |
The image is just a landform and it was not created by aliens. It is a rock that was a natural landform on mars.
It was just another Martian mesa, it had unusaual shadows in it to make it look like a face. It says in paragraph 3 "huge rock formation . . . which resembles a human head . . . formed by shadows giving the illusions of eyes, nose, and mouth." It is just a natural landform on mars that makes it look like a face because of the shadows.
25 years ago there was pictures being took on mars and it seemed to look like a face and some people thought it was aliens that made that landform on the planet mars. It says in paragraph 7 "Mars Global Surveyor flew over cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) teamed snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking Photos." There wasn't any alien monument when they went and flew over it.
Some people still didn't believe that it was just a natural landfrom. In 2001 they took a picture and a digital image 3 times the bigger than the pixel size so you could see if there was something there. It says in paragraph 11 "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!" Anything on that picture you could've seen but there was only the landform there.
There wasn't no alien sign there it was only a landform that was on mars that had shadows that made it look like a face on mars. | 2 |
Getting from point A to point B seems like such a big issue when youre in your teens, having to rely on everything else to get where you need to go. Some of us don't know how beneficial it is to not even have a car to worry about. Millions of Americans get in their car each morning to go to school, work, or to the store, but how much could you really save if you stopped relying on your own vehicle all together? It seems harder than it is but the effects are worth it.
Just owning a vehicle, not even driving it, puts a big dent in your monthly pay check with the insurance and paying off the car. Then add all of the gas money, repairs, and possible tickets, you got yourself a load of cash that you could be saving or spending on something else. Just imagine a life where you have deleted your personal transportation for a week. In source one like Heidrum Walter noticed, "When i had a car i was always tense. im much happier this way." It would take a load of off your shoulders, allow you to be less stressed and able to worry about more important things. On top of making your life a tad easier its one more person contributing to the Earth, taking away air pollution.
Multiple cities around the world are having days throughout the year to give up personal transportation, and some places banning it all together. As source three stated, in Bogota, Columbia, "It was the third staight year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis permitted for the Day Without Cars in this capital city of 7 million." Not even the rain had stopped them from participationg. The fewer vehicles on the streets, means a better environment for everyone.
Studies have shown that Americans are buying and recieving less cars and liscense each year. With unemployment at a high rate and many families still in and recovering from poverty, it's too much money and stress for a lot of people. From source four, "If the pattter persists-and many sociologists believe it will-it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment, since transportation is the second larget source of America's emissions, just behing power plants." Something as simple as limiting our time spent in our cars could benefit the world so greatly, especially with global warming taking a toll quicker.
It may seem difficult at first but it is defiantly duable and effecient to put away vehicles all together, or atleast more often. Cell phones and all the new apps make it easier to communicate with friends, enabling car pooling and to maximize the fuel spent to speak to others. Gathered from source one, "Passenger cars are respnsible for up to 50% of greenhouse gas emissions in some car-intensive areas in the United States." That in its self should be enough to get you out on your feet to lessen the gas that's being emitted. | 2 |
The technology presented in the article is quite impressive and very useful. Although there are many good uses for this tech I don't believe it should be used in a schooling environment. Granted there are many pros to using it. These can include knowing when a student is bored and changing the lesson to something more exciting, or finding out when a kid is infuriated and ready to explode. Also this technology could potentially prevent school shootings by finding out the emotions a student might have. I believe the issue boils down to the lack of privacy students would be feeling and the discomfort of knowing we're being watched.
As a student the thought of always being watched a monitored concerns me. As a teen we sometimes keep our emotions hidden like secrets, and want them to stay that way. The lack of privacy would feel immense. In my opinion the pros and cons have a distinct balance. I would feel safer knowing that the kids on a short fuse would be known about, and worried cause the technology would be violating my privacy.
Really I don't think this technology should be used in a schooling environment. I think the comfort gained by knowing school shootings could be prevented is shot when my privacy comes into question. I think there are many uses for this technology and that many advancements can come from it, but it just doesnt belong in a school. | 2 |
The point of view on driverless cars vary from many people. In my opinion, I don't think that driverless cars are such a good idea. I think that we have found out that not all manufacturing works. There have been wrecks from people actually driving the car because something went out on the car such as brakes. The driverless car could just go out because it is all electric and it relys on the internet. The internet doesn't work all the time, for example I could be going down the road and be on my phone and only have two bars and my phone would not work. The problem could be worse, since I live in Indiana there is a lot of corn fields and country roads, so what if I am going down a country road and there isn't any type or form of internet?
There is a part in the story about how it is illegal in the states of California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia to even test out the theory of driverless cars. I agree with those states, but I also think that it is dangerous and if the system crashed in all these cars it would be really dangerous. There is also a part in the story that catches my eye and it talks about the GPS reciever and the intertial motion sensor and all those things. I have went on vacation and my GPS has lost signal and lost battery or just broke plenty of times, how would it be any different in a driverless car?
The positive sides to driverless cars is the people that text and drive really don't have to worry about wrecking because the car is doing everything for you and you really wouldn't have to watch the road. The other positive side to this driverless car is that there are antilock brakes which means that they are sensors and the story gives us evidence that it has been advanced to detect and respond to the danger of out-of-control skids and rollovers. The story provides us more information about the antilocks, "The information from the sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine, allowing far better response and control more than a human driver can manage alone." I think that that is huge when it comes to driverless cars, it helps with the little wrecks that turn into big wrecks.
The next positive thing that I think for the ddriverless cars is that it could help tremendously with the drunk driving people do. I have experienced my own situation of a drunk driver just recently and they passed away from it. The driverless cars could stop them from swerving all over the road and going to fast. The amount of drunk driving people do is ridiculous and doesn't just put their life in danger but everyone else on the road also. The driverless car is genius for things such as people having their mind on something else such as they get caught off guard to easy or that just hate driving or they are scared of driving.
In conclusion, the points of views from negative to positive vary in multiple ways and it depends on what you personally think. The driverless cars could be the future and make a huge difference to the world but I still think that the driverless cars have a lot of work to do with the system. I also think that it is a good idea to just keep the cars that you drive yourself because that is all anyone knows how to do. I think for now we don't have to worry about the driverless cars, but maybe in the future we something might change. | 3 |
I think that you should get rid of the electoral college because it makes the popular vote unfair. If you are saying we aren't voting for the president we want then we are just voting for the electoral voters we want without knowing that. The electoral college is unfair because if we vote who we want to then we will just get the votes of some electoral voter and if we vote for them they could vote for whoever they wanted to vote for.
If everyone voted for someone thew electoral voters could just vote for whoever they wanted to and we wouln't be able to stop them either. We should change it to popular vote because the electoral college is unfair to everyone who votes for someone. Its not fair because the eletoral vote can make a president lose even if he had the popular vote is on his side.
It should be changed because there is always the disaster factor. If their is a tie then they will just deny the will of the people. If they deny the will of the people it could have disasterous results. It should be changed because it is unfair and it always will have the chance of the disaster factor. | 1 |
Cars. Mostly everyone has been in a car, had a car or most definetly seen a car. They're part of our culture, so deeply engrained that we buy our homes and plan our lives around the commutes we use to go about our lives but recently, cities around the world have been questioning our dependance and need for cars, especially considering the damage they do to our environment. However, the environment doesn't concern the man or woman that is trying to get to work, so what are the other benefits of not having a car? Well, closer locations, a peaceful life style and a close knit community are also elements that come with a world where cars aren't the norm.
For those who think practically, not having a car is a hassel but the thing is that cities that have already implemented this change. Locations are put closer together so that you may only need a car to get to the next city and even then alternate transportations are put in place to help with that. For example Vauban, Germany has completely given up their cars, except for a few placed in choice parking spaces at the edges of the town. Inside the community people ride their bicycles and there are shops placed at close intervals | 1 |
From the very start the author explains the pure beuty of venus, it's nicknamed the "evening star" because its one of the brightest points of light in the sky. Another name for this planet would be Earths "twin" giving the planet a more welcoming and safer tone. The planet is nearly identical in density and size and in distance, Because of its close range you would think studying such a planet would be easy. the only problem is that earth, venus, and mars orbit the sun at difrent speeds making venus sometimes farther from the earth than mars. Venus is, in space terms, "right around the corner" so humans have sent numerous spacecraft, all unmanned, to go and inspect the planet to see if it's safe for human contact. The only problem has been that all the spacecrafts sent have only lasted a couple of hours so to our knowledge it is un-inhabitable. This could explain why we havent had a single spacecraft explore the area in over three decades.
The info we have gathered also contributes to the dangerous nature of venus's reputation as a planet, the atmosphere is described as thick with a blanket of 97% carbon dioxide. A even more challenging factor is the fact that the clouds of venus are highly carosive. Temperatures are over 800 degrees farenheit, the surface temperature of venus is the hottest out of all the plaenets in our solar system.
There's other factor that make venus sound nearly inhospitable but if thats the case why do we still strive to learn more about this vishious planet? Well its because this planet was most likely one of the closest planets related to earth, and still is, it says "long ago, Venus was probobly covered largely with oceans and could have suported various forms of life, just like earth." It is our sister planet and theres many fweatures of the planet that are undisputably analougous to those on earth. SInce the planet is so close it is a crucial factor in play giving how long it takes for spacecraft to reach its destination, saving us time and more reaserch.
Now the only question is making reserch safe and scientifically productive, which National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has already been discusing and they have a compeling idea. What theyre discusing is a spacecraft that can hover over the planets fray ,30 miles or so, out of harms way, safe for scientists to examine from afar and quicker to send spacecrafts to the surface. Solar power would run the spacecraft and radiation from that distance would not exceed that of earths. Conditions wont be easy but they would be managable enough for humans to survive. Here on earth even theyres plenty of studies in the works on seing what technology would work best for surviving on venus. This includes a simple electronic made of silicone tested in a chamber simulating that of venus's harsh surface condition, this simple electronic has lasted three weks under these harsh conditions. With thechnology advancing and humans more and more eager to discover our sister planet, if we keep at it we should one day be able to survive on earths twin. | 2 |
"Are driverless cars coming?" I'm against driverless cars because of saftey, cost, and law.
To begin, i'm against the driverless car because of the saftey issues. In the article it says that "if the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-the driver or the manufacture". Also in the article it points out, driverless cars have light signals to indicate traffic jams and other saftey issues.(What if a person is on a phone or is not paying attention and a car comes out in front of them and the signals dont show in time and someone is hurt).Another saftey problem is the antilock breaks. As you can see their are many things that can go wrong with this car showing that it's not yet saftey to be on the road.
Secondly, the driverless car is a long way from being perfect because of the cost. The cars need smart roads to function. So the cost will fly up because of the updates to support the car. An supporting detail from the article is, "These smart roads systems worked surprisingly well, but they required massive upgrades to existing roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical." People that is less fortunate that wants to by the "eco saving" car would have to pay a enormous amount of money to get this brain car. Another detail from the passage is, Without the option of smarter roads, manufactures turned to smarter cars..." If the manufactures didn't upgrade the roads they had to upgrade the car but it's still a major amount of money going in these cars. So this means what they paid to upgrade the car is going to double when someone wnats to buy it. The expens of this so called smart car is not worth buying.
Next, laws are prohibiting the use of smartcars in some staes. Some laws for the smart car staes that, "...a human driver in control at all time". This law shows that even if the driverless car is developed complety it must have someone controling it, not it controling the driver. This shows that some states believe this law is good because they think a human driver is more safe then being driven around by a robot car. A supporting detail is, " states will follw as soon as the cars are proven reliably safe". This quote shows that the states that have these laws don't trust the driverless car ideal yet. As you can see some laws will never trust the smart car because of the problems and safetey issues it might cause.
Laslty, I was against the driverless car because of safety, cost, and laws. Why would someone get a car coslty car that thats not yet proven to be ready to hurt themsleves? Or are people today just getting lazy? | 3 |
For a while now, driverless cars have a been a debated topic. People everywhere have varying opinions on the use of driverless cars. Some argue that it is an unsafe way of transportation, while others say it's a much easier, more efficent way of getting where you need to go. I personally believe that driverless cars are just as safe as your average non-driverless car and should be allowed.
As stated in "Driverless Cars Are Coming", the cars can steer, accelerate, and brake all by themsleves, just as a human could. When in need of human assistance, in bad traffic, arround accidents, or around construction zones, the car's seat will vibrate, have lights flash, other headlight displays, or even announce that the driver needs to prepare to take control of the car. The cars have sensors that require the human driver be alert and watching the road at all times, which would prevent accidents, proving it to be just as safe as a non-driverless car, if not more. Not only is it just as safe, it is far more efficent. The sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and even reduce power from the engine, which allows response and control better than a human driver could ever portray driving. The sensors also detect and respond to dangerous spurs, such as out-of-control skids or rollovers. Once again, portraying how safe the driverless cars really are. More advancements in the sensors are leading to cars that can handle more and more various driving tasks on their own.
Driverless cars are an extremely safe way of getting places on a daily basis. From their special alerts to their sensors that have "drivers" aware at all times to their more efficent way of breaking and reducing wear and tear on your engine, how could anyone think a non-driverless car could be any better? I bet if we all had a driverless car, driving would be a less-dreaded, much safer way of getting where you need to go! | 2 |
Don't some things sound too good to be true? Well, this is one of many. NASA scientists have found a "face" on Mars. This has been solved to be just a landform, but some people still believe that the "face", was created by aliens. Here are some facts to prove that this is a natural landform.
First of, in 1976, pictures were not the best back then. We were still working on them to make the outcome look better. With the digital images being 3 times bigger than the pixals, you are bound to find something that is not what it seems to be. Also, the "face" is located 41 degrees north martian laditude. This is a more foggy area of the planet. This could explain why the picture looks like a "face". Also, there were other objects around the "face" that casted shadows on the landform, making it look like it has eyes, a nose, and a mouth. This landform is very similer to landforms in the West of the U.S. This would be called a mesa. Finally, the scans of the "face" can only go so far. Plus, the camera doesn't go over the face often either.
Even since cameras have been upgraded for a better picture, NASA can prove that this is not an alien made "face", but a natural landform on Mars. | 2 |
There is a new computer progam software that tell you how are you feeling. The subject of Leonardo da Vinci's Renaissance painting. It tell you if are happy, mad, or sad. This computer progarm software also tell you what percent of each emotion do you have. The software was invented by the Prof. Thomas Huang he is of the Beckman Institude. This institude is for Advanced Sciense at the University of Illionois. He didn't make this computer program alone this was a collaboration with Prof. Nicu Sebe. He is from Amsterdam University. Thomas Huang and his colleague are experts developing ways for humans and computer to communicate.
This all begins when a computer constructs a 3D computer model of the face. As an example that this work they used a picture of Mona Lisa. In the picture she was 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry. I think this is a really good program because this way you know how are people felling and you could undrestand a little bit more thier emotion. This program according to the Facial Feedback not only expresses your emotion but also may even help produce them. Overall I think this a really good program because even with a picture you camn know how people are feeling and it tells you the exact percent. | 0 |
The "Facial Action Coding System" is technology that can be used in the class room because some people can't figure out how good or bad someone is feeling. Teachers will be able to know if the student is learning or eithor not paying attention or sleeping in class. It'll be easier for them to know what's false and what's true expression in their situation they could be in.
In difference in the situation students can't understand someone's expression. Thanks to the technolgy now it'll be easier to figure out students emotion or anyone. The article states, " Using video imagery, the new emotion-recognition software tracks these facial movements- in a real face or in the painted face of Mona Lisa. By weighting the different units, the software can even identify mixed emotions. Each expression is compared against a neutral face.""The Mona Lisa demonstration is really intended to bring a smile to your face, while it shows just how much this computer can do."
Finally, yes the technology is worth a big margin but its worth to have the help we can all get to help us know many. In my opinion it'll be a better way to learn/read better on our emotional expressions because you"'ll have more information and could know more about everything you want or need to know about the expressions. According to the Facial Feedback Theory of emotion, moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them. We humans perform this same impressive "calculation" every day, for instance, you can probably tell how a person is feeling simply by the look on their face. | 2 |
Dear Senator,
I strongly suggest that you keep the Electoral college because of the different benefits it has to offer. It creates more of a certain outcome. Also, it is a way to avoid run-off elections. Even though there may be some negative outcomes to this way of voting, I feel that the advantages overlook them.
The Electoral college is a good method of our voting system in the United States because it helps to develop a more certain outcome. According to the passage titled
In Defense of the Electoral College:Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President by Richard A. Posner, it states that "Because almost all states award electoral votes ona winner-take-all basis, even a very slight plurality in a state creates a landslide electoral-vote victory in that state." This tell that vote is plenty more certain using this method rather than to go by popular vote. With having a more percise and oranized plan of voting it garintees a more certain outcome and will prepare for problems that may occur such as ties in the election. The Electoral College is most definitley a an great voting method when used for certainty.
Another reason why The Electoral College is a great method of voting is because it is a way to avoid run-off elections. According to the same article titled
In Defense of the Electoral College:Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President by Richard A. Posner it tells that "There is pressure for run-off elections when no candidate wins a majority of the votes cast; that pressure, which would greatly complicate the presidential election process, is reduced by the Electoral College, which in variably produces a clear winner." An example of this stated in the article is "Nixon in 19680and clinton in 1992 both had only a 43 percent plurality of the popular votes, while winning a majority in the Electoral College". Avoiding these types of things is very important. If we didnt have this method we would still have to come up with some sort of method so that thing like run-offs don't happen. However, some people disagree with the electoral college because they feel that they aren't really voting for the candidate, it still needs to be used because to many thing can happen such as ties and run-offs that we would need to figure out in the long run.
In conclusion, the Electoral College is very important and needs to continue to be our voting method for the United States. Certainty of the votes outcome and avoiding run-off election are twp ways Electoral votes have helped us. Without this method we would have to be dealing with these issues in some other kind of way. | 3 |
When people see something on the internet or on the T.V they instantly assume aliens but i assure you that the face like object on mars in not an alien artifact. Twenty five years ago we took a picture of mars and there appeared to be some soart of face like figur, when the photo hit the media people all over where convinced thet the object was an aliens face.
But nevertheless even if there was a civilization on mares us in NASA would binifit from it. But studies even show the the object is equivalent to a butte or a mesa-landformes common around the American West. The reason it lookes like a human head was because " a huge rock formation... wich resembles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth"
We know this because when we took a picture in 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo." So of there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyption-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!"
So in the end there is really no dibate weather it is a alien or a land form because here at NASA we have the cold hard proof from all of the photos we have taken to all of the research we have done on the object that the object is just a plain old landform. | 1 |
Driverless cars used to be just a dream. Now that we have the technology to make "driverless cars" there seem to be more and more of a concern as to how these cars could be completely driverless. I am against driverless cars because the cars aren't completely driverless, there will have to be new laws made for these vehicles, and there would be confusion for who to blame.
In the article, the author gave examples as to how the cars were given features that'd make them seem driverless. There were, of course, radar features and motion sensors, but at the end of the day the author of the artilce said, "..None of the cars developed so far are completely driverless." Now of course they can still do the things needed to drive i. e. steer, speed up, and break, but there are still special sensors made to make sure that the driver still has their hands on the wheel. The author of the article then says, "This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." Meaning that the driver must be focused at all times.
Other than the fact that the cars aren't completely driverless, there would have to be new laws added for this new technology. In the ninth paragraph the author says, "Most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers, and pedestrians safe...traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times." This means that the laws now do not include anything regarding driverless cars, basically making them illegal to put on the road. Now they will have to go through a long process of making laws for these new types of cars.
Not only is there a problem with the cars not being completely driverless and that there would have to be new laws made for them, but who would be to blame if there is an accident? In the ninth paragraph of the article, it says, "...even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident. If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault--the driver or the manufacturer?" There would be too much confusion for the lawmakers and everyone else if there was an accident because although the manufacturers made the car, there was still a driver in the driver's seat, so who is to blame? This would cause a lot of conflict in court cases if there were accidents and someone was to be sued.
To conclude this essay, I am against driverless cars because the cars aren't completely driverless, there will have to be new laws made for these vehicles, and there would be confusion for who to blame. The idea of driverless cars is a great idea, indeed, but there would be just too much confusion and conflict regarding these. | 3 |
In "The Chllenges of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. The author uses many details from the article to back this claim up.
In paragraph 8 it says that the natural human curiosity will always lead us to discover new places even if we know theres risks. it states in the paragraph that "but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally inyimidating endevors." we will always be looking for challenges and solutions with explorations and many other things. Also in paragraph 8 it states "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself." This proves theres valuable informations we can learn about Venus despite the risks.
Venus at one time was also the closest thing to earth. In paragraph 4 it says "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." this is a worthy persuit because we can discover many things like how did it lose its water, did it used to have life, what event made it unhospitable, etc. To further more go into it the author says, "Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." Getting to know more about Venus could possibly let us know more about Earth itself.
Lastly in paragraph 5 it says even NASA has hopes of discoverying new things about mars and maybe being able to get man on another planet. tThis would be huge for mankind. It states "The National Aeronautics and Space Administration has one particular compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus." Also stating imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape"
These are only ideas right now to NASA but could be a possibility to us as humans if we take risks and pursuit studying Venus despite the dangers.
To recap the author suggest that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. Theres details in the article supporting this claim. Like in paragraph 8 saying the natural human curiosity wil always push us to discover new things no matter what. Or in paragraph 4 that Venus was the most like Earth at one point of time. In paragraph 5 its an idea that we have man on Venus but that idea can be a reality in due time if we keep studying Venus. These are the details supporting the authors claim that Venus is worth pursuing despite the dangers it presents. | 3 |
Driverless cars could be the car of the future.
Many companies like GM and Google are working to create the driverless car.
They are working on improving the models that were already created, but these new care could lead to bad events.
Because of the lack of human attention, computer errors, and new liability questions driverless cars should not be developed.
Sitting in the driver's seat of a driverless car, may cause more issues than benefits.
According to the article, "the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires."
In order to drive. the human can not be distracted by phones or food, but with the idea of being in a driverless car, the human will be.
In self-driver cars, people are distracted by their phones, even though they must pay attention to road.
The distracions will be more dangerous in driverless cars because as the article states, "none of the cars developed so far are completely driverless. When people enter the new cars, they will believe that they do not have to pay attention because the car is driverless.
When the car malfunctions, the person is the car would be so distracted that even with devices to get the driver's attention, he or she would not be able to react quickly enough.
The extreme lack of attention would cause accidents, injuries, and deaths.
Driverless cars are run by sensors, hardware, and software.
In many cases, these items are known to crash or suddenly stop working.
A computer crashing can lead to bad events and having that computer crash while driving a car would make the events twice as worse.
The brakes may stop working, the car might steer itself off the road, or it could even steer into another car.
If humans have no control over the car, they can not try to steer the car the other way when it crashes.
People would believe they are invincible with the new cars, but techhnology is know to fail.
When technology fails, the driverless car would get into some crash.
With the crash, liabiltiy questions would erupt.
The article states that "if the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault- the driver or the manufacturer?"
The person in the driver seat would want to blame the car and the company that created it.
The car company would want to blame the person for lack of attention.
According the the article, "new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in case of an accident."
This creates more trouble for state governments.
Driverless cars seem great innovative with the idea of not having to ever drive again.
Although there is real danger that accompanies driverless cars.
With the thought of the car being invincible, humans will be less alert.
When the system goes down, people would not be able to react in time.
The people who do not react in time would cause accidents and blame the car companies.
Driverless cars would be more trouble than helpful. | 2 |
In this essay, I will write an argument aginst the development of high tech cars. I believe using these cars can be good. These cars are advancing regions in the technology world with the use of more enhanced technology. One thing people must think about is how this idea is not perfect, it will run into error. Lets suppose and accident occurs, who do you blame, the person or the car? Well the car is highly developed isn't it? Well, the person could've stepped on the break?
These may be some questions pondering your mind right about now. In my opinion, I believe we should not have driverless cars.
There's a difference between having a more developed car and having a car where you do not need to drive. A more enhanced car will higher technology, sseat warmers in the back and cameras that help you view the blindspot. Man, we have come a super long way with technology. Driverless cars? That almost seems too advanced for our present time.
We must realize that being advanced in areas is not a bad thing. If anything, it's good. We must remember the safety aspect of it all. Is it safe? We must remember the cost. Is it affordable? Some of these questions will really make you think.
The idea of having more developed cars is certainly not a bad thing, just maybe now is not the right time. We can think of better ways to farm and cultivate our food. Helping other countries that are in need with more useful techniques. We should use this time to find out a more efficient way to do more for the people around us. Maybe having a more developed car is doing that, but I don't see it.
Thank you for letting me share my opinion. | 1 |
I think the development of driveless cars is a helpful way for people. It can bring us a lot of convience in our lives. So I support that the development of these driveless cars.
Can you imagine a time in the future when one one bus cars because no one needs them anymore? I believe it will happen someday not far from now. Like Google's cofounder said:" I believes such cars would fundamentally change the world." You might think driveless cars are so not safe and reliable. And I have to say you are totally wrong with this thought. Because driveless cars have more benefits than normal cars.And there are some reasons that I want to state.
People don't have to spend more time on learning how to drive and dificult driving skills. They can steer,accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills,such as navigating through work zones and around accidents. This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires. This necessitates the car being ready to quickly get the driver's attention whenever a problem occurs.
Manufacters are also considering using cameras to watch that drivers are remaining focused on the road. While the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver.
The second reason is people don't have to focus on driving.Such displays can be turned off instantly when the driver needs to take over-something not available to drivers trying to text with a cell phone. In this way,the in-car system is actually a safety feature, and safety is a big concern. And the driveless car don't need to worry about the safety parts. They are even more safe than normal cars.
Therefore, I support to use driveless cars in the future,maybe someday.
I believe because of driveless cars, our lives will make throught easier and more comfortable.
And I believe someday the driveless cars will completely instead to cars. | 3 |
Dear Senator,
I think the United States of America should change or abolish the Electoral College because sometimes it is not actually what the people want. In the 2000 Election Al Gore won the popular vote meaning more people in the USA wanted him at President than the winner. Should'nt we give the people what they want? A poll states thart over 60% of United States voters want to change or get rid of the Electoral College for this exact reason. The state sends people to represent the State not to represent the people. The state or people in office could totally defy whatever the people want in that state.
Lets say there is a tie. Then every state would have only 1 vote meaning the little state of Delaware would have as much say as the huge state of California. This example is the complete opposite of doing what the people want.This means the 35 million people have as much say as the 500,000 or sol in Delaware. Our government bases off what the people want but the Electoral College dosen't always base off what the people more than what the state wants itself.
Each party representing the state selects the "trusted" people for each state. What if those people have a change of heart and they decide to change towards something the state dosen't want. (Which is very possible) Then what would happen? Would either the Democrats or Republicans really be elected or would it just be 270 people in the room just be deciding whatever they want?
Sincerly,
PROPER_NAME | 2 |
Recently, a new technology, the Facial Action Coding System, has allowed for the identification of human emotions by computers. This technology sparks the interest of many, myself included; however, I do not believe that there is any use for it in the classroom. The technology in the classroom is not valuable because it will cost money, humans can read facial expressions and body language well on their own, and also it may be a learning curve compared to traditional learning.
The new technology will undoubtedly cost some money, whether it be the cost for research or the cost of purchasing the software itself. Software licenses can be costly for some schools, and it may be out of their budget. With education heading towards a more digital path rather than a paper and pencil path, schools will be spending more money on computers and digital devices. I see the software as something that will only be used a nominal amount, and overall will be a waste of school funds.
When your friend looks like they are having a bad day, you can typically be able to read their facial expressions and body language. This is something that computers will not be able to do as well as a friend or family member. Sure, a computer can read your emotions based on the position of muscles, but a friend can better tell when your mood is off. In the text, the author states, "In fact, we humans perform this same impressive "calculation" every day. For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." The author also states, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." Generally, a teacher can tell when their students are not understanding their lesson or are bored by reading their body language. They may have a hand on their head with their eyes barely open to show that they are tired of listening to the lesson, or they may have their eyes squinted if they are confused. In paragraph 6 author states, "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication, so computers need to understand that too." This nonverbal communication can be easily interpreted by the teacher, and is not needed to be done by a computer.
Lastly, the technology may be a learning curve to both students and teachers. The author states, "For example, if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different, A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." This technology could be inaccurate and ineffective to students who think to change their facial expressions. They could exploit the software to manipulate the questions in their favor. I believe that the traditional way of teaching is more effective, and if the student does not understand the question, they can ask for help right away or arrange for help at a later time.
Overall, I do not believe that the Facial Action Coding System would be usefull in the classroom setting. It may be innovative and new, but it does not have a place in education. The technology will be costly, it is pointless because humans can already red emotions, and also it would provide a bit of a learning curve for students and teachers. | 4 |
In the article, "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars. After personally reading this article, I believe a driverless car would be a positive impact on the road today. The article mentions many positive things including fuel efficency, crash proof, advanced safety sensors, and an understanding computer that knows when driving is too difficult for its self. I believe that driverless cars will become a positive impact due to extreme environmental safety, driver safety, and intelligent computer understanding.
In the first paragraph, the author states that, "The cars he foresees would use half the fuel of todays taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus.". In our environment, we have had many mishaps dealing with cars and the pollution they cause to our environment from the day they were made. When the author states that the driverless cars would use half the fuel as that of a taxi, it brings hope for the environment that so far no popular vehicle could provide. The cars will not only be protecting the environment, but also humans.
The author informs us that the driverless car has gone "half a millon miles without a crash"(P2) which is a major factor when it comes to the health and well being of humans on and around the roadways. The author continues to talk about Google's modified car that, "needed a whole lot of sensors"(P4) and "had become more advanced to detect and respond to the danger of out-of-control skids"(P5). To a beginning driver like myself, a car can be very overwhelming with everything and one you must beware of. The driverless cars are decked out with sensors and cameras to do exactly that. All of the sensors and montiors will help the driver and passagers continue driving without the worry of an accident unlike how driving is now. The driverless not only have smart sensors, they also have smart minds.
The driverless car comes with an extreme amount of sensors for protection but the car is also so smart, it understands when driving is beyond it's ability and that a human must drive in this area. The author tells us just how smart these cars are, "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents."(P7). The driverless car is not exactly driverless yet, but it is due to the important promise that anyone in or around the driverless car will be safe.
In conclusion, the driverless car is more fuel efficent and environmentally safe compared to the vehicles we drive today. Not only is the driverless car safe to the environment though, it is also safe to all passengers and pedestrians. The driverless car has many sensors and cameras so that when it is driving, it is as if an aware human is driving instead. The driverless car does have its limits though but it is not afraid to admit it. When roadways become too difficult of the car to drive its self, the car informs the driver when his/her turn is to drive. The driverless is a fall proof, safe car to be driving on our roads today. I am personally excited and very supportive of the newest autopilot car to arrive this year in 2016, and so should you. | 4 |
Ok, well Luke was a Seagoing Cowboy and he got to see many intresting sites when on the job. The artical states that Luke got to see what it is like to be in those countreys. But yet, in the end on their way back they did have lots of fun playing many games on ship.
The first reason you should be a Seagoing Cowboy is because you get to help other people, animals, supplies, and you get to feel what its like to be in that place. And you do get to see some pretty amazing sites. You do get to go over sea, and you will be with other people so you won't be lonly. And you can be under 18 to join the Seagoing Cowboys.
The second reason you should join is because you will not be lonly, you will have friends there, also you can get friend or family to join if you want. you also can play games on your way back. And it is the UNRRA (the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration) who are hiring you to work for them. And yet why wouldn't you want to join, it is a one in a lifetime opportunity.
Some people say that you should not join reasons why, well frist off they that you can be killed which is true but yet very low chance of that happinging. They also say that its not worth it and that all that stuff is going to be gone anyway but yet before you can lose the supplies why not use them to help. And they say that you can end up bringing crimanals but yet the Seagiong Cowboys would most likly will bring criminals to safe places but yet make sure that they don't hurt anyone.
In concusion you should join because you get to help people and animals, you get to see amazing sites, you get to have fun, and you do not have to be lonly when working for them. | 2 |
Dear , State Senator
I think that they should keep our despised method of choosing the president. The way we choose our president every 8 years is okay. Nothing is wrong with they way we change our presidents. The electoral votes has done a great job with no complaints. The way now has been going for a long time and they shouldn't change it.
The electoral college consists of many electorals. They consist of 538 electorals. Majority of the electoral votesare 270, which is required to elect the President. Under the 23rd Admendment of the Constitution, the District of Cloumbia is allocated 3 electors and treated like a state on purposes of the Electoral College.
Each canidate running for President in your state has his or her own group of electors.
Afte the presidential election, your governor prepares a "Certificate of Ascertainment " listing all of the candidates who ran for President n your state along with the names of their respective electors. The Certificate of Ascertainment also declares the winning presidential canidate in your state and shows which electors will represent your state at the meeting of the electors in December of the election year.
Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but forr aslate of electors, who in turn elect the president. If you lived in Texas, for instance, and wanted to vote for [John] Kerry,you'd vote for a slate of 34 Democtratic electors pledged to Kerry. On the off-chance that those electors won the statewide election,they would go to Congress and Kerry would get 34 electoral votes.
It can be argues that the Electoral College method of selecting the president may turn off potential voters for a candiate who has no hope of carrying their state-Democrats on Texas,for example, or Republicans in California. Knowing their vote will have no effect, they have less incentive to pay attention to the campaign than they would have if the president were picked up by popular vote.
Sincerly,
PROPER_NAME | 0 |
The author that studying Venus or Evening Star he poin is a venus is a pursuit despite the dangers and my opinion is maybe yes and maybe no why?
Because venus have a really good poins but in the same time not
For example: Venus is the closest planet to Earth, Have 97 percent carbon dioxide The temperatures average over 800 degrees F, and the atnospheric pressure is 90 times, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system These contidions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth that's are ones of why venus in not a persuit despite the dangers.
Another examples is: Venus have been the most Earth-Like planet in our solar system, Venus can sometime be our nearest option for a planetary visit that'a are ones good why venus is despite the dangers.
so this terms the NASA send humans to go and study venus and them resul is venus good for despite the dangers or not
and the result are good find more things and them resolve the problems the NASA say not easy conditions, but survivable for humans. | 1 |
A coding system that can identify facial expressions of a person, how crazy. Prof. Thomas Huang of the University of Illinois and Prof. Nicu Sebe have created a coding system that can not only identify human emotions put on a painting. Using this technology in the classroom would be valuable to not only the student but the teachers the classroom.
Using this coding system would be helpful to the students. For example, in paragraph six, it states, the system could tell if a student was getting confused or bored in class, then it could modify the lesson. Using this method could get students more involved in the lesson by making it easier to understand or making it more fun. Making it easier to understand could help the students learn the material faster and could possibly increase the students grade in the class. Making it more fun could get the students more involved in the lesson by asking questions about the lesson.
This technology could also help the teachers. In paragraph six it states that the technology can modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor. Using this system could help a teaher with their students because they cannot pick out the exact muscle movements of certain emotions the coding system can. For example, in paragraph three it states the operation and process of the sytem. First, it constructs a 3-D computer model of the face, then it observes the fourty four major muscles in the of the face of the model. When it is looking at the model it is looking for an action movent. An action movement is one or more muscles moving. Different combinations of the different muscles in the face create different emotions such as happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. How this would help the teacher is it could look at more faces faster than the teacher and it could pick out the slightest emotional change in a student. Then the system could modify the lesson to keep the students interested in it.
Finally it would help the classroom. In paragraph nine it states that empathy or the feeling someone else's emotional state. may happen because we unconsiously imitate another person's emotions. This could effect the classroom. For example, if one student is sad their friends would try to comfort them and the might become sad too. Is a student begins to laugh they might cause other students to laugh. Having this coding system in a classroom could alert a teacher if a student is sad, so they can handle it so other students don't get upset. This could help keep the atmosphere of the classroom positive so learning can be done effeciantly.
Using this technology in the classroom would be valuable. From modifing the leeson to make it easier for the students to understand and helping the teacher keep their students interested in the lesson to keeping the atmosphere of the classroom positve this coding system would be valuable in the classroom. | 3 |
Now, these days computer softwares are able to do so many things, such as sing (Vocaloid), organize our schedule, and even recognize our emotions.
This new software is called Facial Action Coding System and was created by Prof. Thomas Huang, from the University of Illinois, with colaboration of Prof. Hicu Sebe from the University of Amsterdam. These two profesors are experts at developing better ways for humans and computers to comunicate.
The purpose of the Facial Action Coding System is to recognize the subtle facial movements that humans use to express their emotions. The process of creating this new technology began with a 3-D computer model of the human face; all 44 facial muscles were included. With the of psychologists, such as Dr. Paul Eckman. Eckman classified six basic emotions such as: happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. Then associated each with characteristic movements of the facial muscles.
Have you wondered if this technology would be useful for a classroom?
It would certantly be useful in some cases, for example, an investigation. Imagine there has been a case of bullying that ended up with suicide. Everyone who is connected to the victim, which is a student, had to be tested with the FACS (Facial Action Coding System) to whether tell if the student was telling the truth. In these kind of cases would be useful.
However, if this techology, the FACS, was used for only classroom purposes the would only be for Pscychology. This is a High School level class, it wouldn't be used for Elemtary or Middle School. Unless the staff of the schools introduces this technology to the kids. Unless there is a study for kids emotions at school when presented in various different situations.
In conclusion, there are many uses for this software but not exactly for classroom uses. The government, the police, investigators, and phisicans may use these to determine many things. Crimes would be sloved by studying the expressions of a suspect in a trial or interogation. | 2 |
Dear Senate , it is evident that many people think electoral voting is the wrong thing to do. I think that we sould use another method of voting like popular voting. I feel this way because the president that you might be voting for might win the popular vote but because he had lost the electoral vote he doesnt become president. I believe this is wrong because the president with the majority of vote by the U.S. should win, people should be able to decide who is president , and because I think its wrong to not give the U.S. citizens what they want.
Although electoral voting may seem good its not because you dont really vote for your president that you want your voting for a slate of elector that pick the president they would rather have . In "Source 2:The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defense of the system are wrong" it state that "Under the electoralcollege system , voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors , who in turn elect the president" From this we can see that its shouldnt be like this because the people should be able to choose the president who they voted for. also in source 2 it states " The single bets argument against the electoral college is what we might call the disaster factor. The American people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century; the system allows for much worse. Consider that state legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people." This just show how bad electoral voting can get . So we need to change the way of voting before it gets out of hand.
After reading the passage I see another problem that electoral voting causes , which is that electoral voting is unfair to the people of the united states. It states "At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each state candidates dont spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning focusing only on the tight race in the "swing" states." this just explaing that candidate that know that they cannot win your states votes wont even bother to try.
People might feel that electoral voting is the best way to vote because we've always used it, and because it restores some balance that me be needed with larger states. But their still wrong because electoral voting has caused many problem for us in the past and how dont we know it will not cause them in the future. that why we should change our way of voting.
Electoral voting is a bad method of voting because it is unfair to people, most of the time your not even voting for the candidate you want, and because its like of vote don't count on whether or not we get the president that we would like. | 3 |
Venus or called the Evening Star now it can be posible watch the planet for ourselves?
Venus is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky, Venus is a important part of our solar system. Venus is actually a planet the author's point is give us information that not all people know about Venus or details like Venus is the second planet from our sun.
One important point is
"Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun" and also that present addition impediments like erupting volcanoes. Our atmosphere it is almost 97 percent carbopn dioxide blakets Venus. On the planet's surface. temperatures average over 800 degrees which is more extreme than anything
humans encounter on Earth.
That is not a impediment for humans to visit Venus as the author express in the article " NASA has one particularly idea for sending humans to study Venus and send more details to us so we can have a express idea of how Venus reality.
Another point to demostrate is that " radiation would not exceed Earth levels, not easy conditions but survivable for humans" that what NASA express but the people who visit Venus cannot take samples like rocks,gas, or anything else.
In conclusion that would be interest if the NASA aprobe send all type of people to the Earth, if they aprobe that would be safely because the NASA is working with old technology that is safe to control, and now the human curiosity will be done because we should be expanded to meet Earth. | 1 |
When you're driving you are harming the planet. Allot of people do not realize the impact that they are making on the enviroment. Besides the fact that youre releasing toxins into the air driving is also dangerous and you can harm other people if youre not careful. There should be limited car usage for multiple reasons. It is much cheaper to ride a bike, in some places when you own a car you have to pay seperatly for a garage to put it in and you also need to buy a car and cars are not cheap. Riding youre bike places is better for the enviroment and will save you money that otherwise would have to be pent on a car and putting gas in it. Also if there is limited car use then the green house gas emmision could be lowered. Another reason is that people who are driving are likely to be tense and when you're on a bike you could be much happier than driving a car everywhere.
When you own a car there is alot of maintnence that goes into the car. Also when you own a car you need to put gas in the car. In places like Germany there are very few places to park a car and they also have to pay to put it into a garage. Owning a car could be a very costly deal and it would be much easier to ride a bike down the street to the market or other places that you need to go.
The green hosue gas emission in the United States is up to fifty percent. Driving cars everywhere is ruining our enviroment. We need this earth to last as long as we can and polluting it is not going to help us. Riding your bike places is an efficent way of transportation it may not be the fastest but it will get you where you need to go without polluting our earth. Driving cars is not only polluting our earth but it is also killing people, irresponsable drivers that drive under the infuence have killed dozens of people. Riding a bike is much more safe.
It is said that allot of people are tense when they are driving and that giving up driving has made people much happier and less stressed. When you give up driving you also give up the stresses of driving and makes you hapier.
If there is a limited use on driving it could make you ess stressed, it could lessen the pollution on earth, and it could save you money and get you to places safer and cheaper than driving a car. | 2 |
Dear, State Senator,
I think that we should not change the way we vote we should keep the Electoral College. Maybe instead of changing everything we should keep what we have. Most likely everthing will be a total disaster. If we change everything it will all fall under the pressure. We really dont need change in the world today as it is. It will be hard to get up after this big of a fall.
Well what is bad about the Electoral College is that it is unfair for the voters that is doing the voting. Because it is all about the system of winners taking all. Some candidates dont spend time in the states. If they really know that they do not have the chance of winning. They say that this stuff is outdated and irrational. They are thinking of abolishing the Electoral College instead of keeping it.
But on the other hand what is good about it is that it is widely regarded as an anachronism. It is a non-democratic method of selecting a president. But it is not a democratic in a modern sense. But it is good because the people vote for a trusted slate of electors. But the trusted electors vote for the party`s nominee. Even though the Electoral College has a lack of most everything.
Everyone has that one good argument. Everyone calls the Electoral College a disaster factor. It says that the people in America should consider themselves lucky. Well because in the year 2000 a election called fiasco was one of the biggest election crisis in the century. The legislature`s are technically responsible for picking the electors. Well also the electors can defy the will of the people.
Also this thing can be argued. Well about changing and also maybe keeping the Electoral College. Because there is some pro`s and con`s to this situation. There is going to be up`s and down`s when it comes to this topic. There might be many more to come in the near future. This topic is one topic that everyone is arguing about this day in time.
Well thank you for taking your time and reading my essay. This was a good topic to argue about. I hope my responce will help to understand my point of view of things. I really do hope that we do keep what we have going on with the voting thing. I really do not think we should not change anything. So have a good day and once again thank you for taking the time and reading this. | 1 |
Unmasking the Face on Mars
"Come over here quick!" As I told my NASA crew members, I told them that I had found something. Hi i'm a scientist at NASA diccusing the face that another scientist thinks it was created by aliens. As i told them they all came and was wondering what I needed them for and if I found clues. "I think I found parts of the face that is not an aliens." states one of the scientist at NASA. We didn't find anything unusual, except that there may be more than one of the faces.
Many of the scientist are starting to wonder if this face was created by aliens. Scientists have tooked camera over and there is no alien monument after all, But how do you get the others to believe thats theres not. Not everyone was satisfied. The face on mars is located 41 degress north latitude. The camera they had been using had to peer through wispy clouds to see the face. They said the aliens marks may have been hidden by haze but some didn't even think that their were aliens marking and said that it is just a natural landform, but then again how could they prove it.
April 5, 1998, Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time ever. Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter camera team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the orginal photos. Many anxious web surfers were waiting for the first image to appear on their screens. All they got was a natural landform no sign of alien transformation.
Lastly, NASA had many images for web surfer to see. The caption that they had noted underneath was huge rock formation. Which is resembles a human head. It is formed by shadows giving the illusion of the eyes, nose and mouth. The authors reasoned that it would be a good way t engage and attract the public attentions to Mars.
What the picture was actually showing was the martian equivalent if a mesa or a landform. Which was common around the AMerican West. It reminds many people of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idoho. Thats a lava dome that takes the form of a isolated mesa about the same size as the face on Mars. | 1 |
Imagine getting into the driver's seat of a car. Now picture yourself sitting down and starting the engine, and just sitting in the driver's sit while the car continues to drive and nagivative around the town. that is what a driverless car would feel like. But what happens when someone gets in a wreak, do they blame the car, or the person sitting in the driver's seat. People think that driverless cars are the future, but what if the cars are not all the way driverless, how much money will it cost, and what does the law say about having driverless cars on the road.
First, the text states that " In 2013, BMW announced the development of "Traffic Jam Assistant." The car can handle driving functions at speeds up 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel."
Not all of the driverless cars are actually driverless. Some of the driverless cars make a sound when the driver needs to take over and start driving. So, the car is not completly driverless.
Second, how much money would a driverless car cost. The automobile companies are using more technology when buliding driverless cars. Is the technology going to cost more. In paragraph 4 the text states that " Google's modified Toyota Prius uses postion-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a roating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the review mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and inertial motion sensor." All of those items in a car can not be cheap.
Finally, what laws are on driverless cars? In the states of California, Nevada, Florida, and the District of Columbia it is illegal to test drive a computer- driven car. Most of the laws for automobiles are made of humans being behind the wheel and in control of the car. Also the text states " even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needs in order to cover liability in the case of an accident." That law would be in place so if someone driving a driverless car where to get into a wreak, the law would know who to blame.
In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," we learn how driving driverless cars can be dangerous, and costly. | 2 |
The electorial college is one of the worst things to happen to america. there are so many reasons why but i will just give you three. It does not allow us to vote for president anymore. It's a lazy system. The voters have a right to pick yet it's not up to use it's up anyone who is not in office. The electorial system has just to may flaws.
The first reason is it doesn't alow us to vote for president anymore. The goverment has someone high in power of each state deside even if it's not true its who they want and how they want it. The electorial vote was created by some people high in power. Richard Nixon Jimmy Carter Bob Dole The U.S.A. chamber of commerce the CIO AFL all created the electorial vote mind you that all were know for bad ideas.
The second reason is It's a lazy system. Before some had to count all votes now no on has to count them the leaders of the states do it for them they pick who they feel and thats it. At any point in time there could be a tie because there is an even number of voters. Someone could even lows there presedince even if he gets the most votes.
The third and final reason is the reason that we use the electorial vote. We use it because its cheaper that way. The government wont tell u but its a cheaper way of voting. They know that if we use there way the money will come out of our pockets not theres so the have us use this way in stead.
Well there you have it there is why an electorial vote is bad. I will give them this it is easier. But still there are so many reasons why its bad. We dont even vote anymore the leader of a state does. Its lazy and bab for either candidate. The electorial vote has been and will always be a bad way to vote and a bad thing for America and its history. | 2 |
I am Luke Bomberger. I am a Seagoing Cowboy. This is a United Nations program to bring aid to European countries unable to provide for themselves after the war. We take care of the animals being sent overseas while they are on the boats. Our jobs are to feed and water the animals, bring the food up from below deck, and clean the animal's stalls. I know this sounds like a boring job that's all work, but there are many reasons why this job is so fun.
The first reason is because while you are in the countries you are visiting, you get to go sightseeing. I saw things like the Panama Canal, the Acropolis, and an excavated castle. I also got to ride a gondola in Venice. You may be able to see such famous landmarks as the Eifle Tower, or the Leaning Tower of Pisa. Oh, and did I forget to mention that you get paid for that? If you have always wanted to travel, then this job just might be for you.
Another reason is because you get to slack off on the return trip. On the trip home, you have dropped off all the animals, so you no longer have a job to do. This means you have free time to do whatever you want. When I was on return trips, we would start up baseball games in the rooms where the animals used to be kept. Other times, someone would bring a deck of cards, and we would spend hours just playing poker. Once, we even had a table-tennis tournament.
This is certainly a fun and exciting job. On a more serious note, this job can make you more aware of other peoples problems. There are many troubled countries across the world. You should do what you can to help. You could donate time to an aid cause as I did, or you could donate money to a charity. It really dosen't matter. Just do what you can. | 3 |
In a classroom full of students, teachers don't usually have the time to check that every student is enjoying the lesson, paying attention while being productive in class. Many students might be tired from a long night of homework, and what would the teacher do if a student was mentally tired? The teacher could get the student to do some form of physical activity like jumping jacks, but this will not get a student mentally active and engaged in class.
In the article, "Making Mona Lisa Smile", the author describes a computer program that can read people's emotions by the muscles in their face. The author never states that the program can scan multiple faces at once, and if it could, how would it make a whole class of moody students all happy at the same time. A student could be bored from the lesson and another be stressed out by a test the next period. How would the program help the teacher change all the different emotions that the students have to happiness.
This program can read faces and guess what emotion that person is feeling at that exact moment. This sounds very useful
and it is, for one person, but not a whole classroom of people. Until the program can create solutions to help all the students to fell better, it would just stress out the teacher by trying to make everyone happy, which if we look at history, is almost impossible. | 2 |
I agreed that using technology to read students emmotional expression of students in classroom because the computer could see if the student is about to sleep or if the students mad sad or dont care the computer also could wake the students up by adding a lilttle fun on the assiment they doing because no one like boring work maybe that would change students emotion and make them care more and to be more intrested of what they doing . In the article it states "A classroom computer could recoginize when a student is becoming confused or bored " Also in the acticle it states" then it could modify the leson ,like an effective human instructor "
these quote mean that computers are able to see humans emotions and make them feel better in sime kind of way for me they saying a computer is like a friend to humans and they could help u . | 1 |
When describing the face found on Mars I would first tell about how it was found. The face on Mars was located by accident by a spacecraft circling around the planet Mars taking snapshots of possible landing areas for its sister ship Viking 2, when the spacecraft saw a look-alike of a human face.
I would then start to describe the facts about the face. It was also enormous too,two miles long from end to end. At first scientists believed it was a Martian mesa, which was common around the area the face was located in. Eventually the picture was unveiled for the world to see, for 25 years the image was posted in haunted grocery check out lines or in books and magazines, it even stared in a hollywood film too. Although a few scientists did believe that the face found on mars wasn't in fact an alien artifact.
After i would then finishis by reveileing facts and information to them. The face had been photgraphed to get a clearer picture of what looked like to be the head of and Egyptian. Although Cydonia, the place where the face was located, is not easily found the photagraphers, on April 5, 1998, were able to find it and took more pictures to get good looks at it. What they found in the image's were actually showing a butte or mesa, commonly known as ladforms, they are also common around the west of America. The most likely scenerio for the face to of been built was by natural lanforms and erosion. Even some scientists believed that the face was just a landformation and not an alien artifact. | 2 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.