Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
I disagree that the use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable because why should we care if this kind of technology knows about our emotions, It is a waste of time and money, worst things could happen if FACS becomes the next big thing.

First, why should we care if this kind of technology knows about our emotions. Technology is basically making life easier to work. For example building constructions with cranes, using snow blowers to get the driveway cleared up faster, building wind turbines and solar panels to harvest energy from the earths elements. This type of technology does not need to know how we feel. Technology should only envolve if it is going to greatly effect the future in a positive way.

Second, it is a waste of time and money. There is no benefit of having Facial Action Coding System but one, reading our emotions. It is the peoples' job to know how all of us feel. People who are into technology should only spend money if and only if they are making life easier. FACS should not be pattented, it is a waste of time, and no benefit but one and that is reading our emotions.

Last but not least, worst things could happen if FACS becomes the next big thing. People out there already making androids that speak like humans, look like humans, and eventually act like ones. What is next? Androids doing their own job by doing curtain actions, or maybe taking our everyday jobs so that we can sit on our couch being lazy, and get fat because we are no longer proactive. My history teacher said,"When is helping hurting?" You don't realise it until something bad happens.

In conclusion, the use of technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is "not" valuable because we shoud not care if FACS knows about our emotions. It is a waste of time and money because it does not make life easier, and worst things could happen if this kind of technology becomes the next big thing.

Score: 3