essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
class label 6
classes |
|---|---|---|
dada74b | The Facial Action Coding System is a major benefit to the psychology community. This program could be as, if not more beneficial to public schooling systems worldwide. Using this program in public school systems would help all teachers, especially psychology teachers, and school counselers alike while also helping to prevent potential tragedies. Based off the information presented in the article, this program is a useful learning tool benefiting both students and teachers be more productive. Using technology to bolister class productivity is a no brainer on whether or not this program should be inserted into public school systems.
Teachers are constantly put in a position where they have to guess whether students are understanding their lesson or not. Everyone learns in different ways and it can be trying on a teacher to know wether or not they reached the whole class or not. In the article, Making Mona Lise Smile, it is said that Dr. Huang believes "A classroom computer could recognize when when a student is becoming confused or bored." He then continues to say how this program could help a teacher modify his or her lesson to meet the needs of as many students as possible. This makes the program very helpful to teachers striving to keep students both engaged and learning. A student may be engaged by a teachers presentation, yet not understand what the material being presented means. It could also tell if the teaching stategy is working for select students but not reaching out to many other students. If the prgram was used to see what teaching method keeps students productive and reaches the largest portion of the class, the teacher could adjust their teaching strategy accordingly to meet the needs of the student. Using this program could make class more insightful and more entertaning, which is a win for both students and teachers alike.
This program would be very useful in specific classes that require face to face interaction to help teach students. One such class this particular program would be useful in would be a psychology class. If young psychologists could learn from this device when people are faking a smile or if a person is sad it would be very beneficial to their future careers. The article states the program can identify a fake smile by the rasing of the zygomatic major, which begins at the cheekbones, to tell if a celebrity or politician is faking their attitude. Using the program to study what is real and what is fake could help psychologists treat patients correctly. Learning how to do this at a younger age in school would be a tremendous help rather than learning on the job by opinion.
It is impossible to predict when tragedy could strike, but it is possible to limit its frequency. In the year 2018 there have been a reported eighteen school shootings thus far in the first two months. Many of these were performed by misunderstood students who needed help but didn't recieve the help they needed or people were blind to it. If this program was implimented into school systems it might be able to catch depression and treat it before it got out of hand. The author states the program can detect both sadness and anger in an individual. If students are required to use the program before and after school everyday in order to gather data on how a student is feeling, the school could see if a student is frequently depressed. It's normal for a student to be sad or angry on occasion, but if a student has been recorded as sad or angry for muliple weeks this program could get them the help and couseling they need. The article states just forcing a smile can make people happier and that the program can detect fake smiles. Even if a depressed student is faking a smile to try to avoid detection these features could tell who is faking smiles and thus making the individual a little bit happier in the process by trying to smile. School shootings are a terrible tragedy, but if this program could help stop these horrific occasions it should be used in school systems.
Based off information presented in the article along with my key arguments this program should be installed in every public schooling institution in America. Any device that can benifit a students learning experience while making teachers lives easier should be available to schools systems for educational use. This device can prepare future psychologists to be better at their proffesion while also helping students get the help they need. A device that not only helps students learn and prepare for the future, but also could potentionally save lives should be necccesary in public school systems across the United States. | 45
|
264902b | In "The Challange of Exploring Venus," the author explains in detail on how despite the dangerous aspects of the planet venus, the overall planet has potiential. They say venus concludes of "Not easy conditions,but suriviable for humans". Human life is definitly possible for the planet Venus, however their are prices that come along with the reward.
Venus is known as "Earth's Twin". It is the closest planet to earth, refering to the size and density. The planets interior consist of rocky sediments and familar features that are seen on earth such as mountains. Venus is seen as the most earth like planet in our solar system, giving a viewof consideration to take a visit. However, there are many downfalls to this planet.
Venus presents many erupting volcanos,powerful earthquakes and occasional dangerous lighting strikes. 97% of Venus atmosphere is made up of carbon dioxide which isnt good for human life. There are high clouds of sulfuric acid that harm the air. The average tempature consist of over 800 degrees fahrenheitm follwing high pressure levels of 90x greater of whats on earth.
Despite the risk and harmful factor of Venus, it is still possible to be survivable for humans. Once upon arrival, NASA concludes that "air pressure would be close to sea level on Earth" making it relate more to human life on earth. Venus would be toasty, considering the tempature on but there is still ablities for human survival. | 23
|
090c52d | In all honesty, if it were up to me, I would keep the Electoral College. Because imagaine what a catastrophe it would be if we did not have the Electoral College, how would they count the votes. Anybodyvoted on who you wanted to win it go can cheat the number of votes to change the president they are voting for. With the Electoral College you can't do that because, once you voted who you want to win, it get sent out tothe electors. Who from that point on count how many voted for both of them and decide a winner.
Now it is possible for somebody to secretly change the names that way but it is a higher stake, or risk to take not having the Electoral College. Also, it is possible for worker of the Electoral College to make a mistake in countung the counting the votes and to cause a big confussion in the votes but that is very highly impossible, if not impossible.
If you lived in Texas, for instance, and wanted to vote for John Kerry, you'd vote for a slate of 34 Democratic 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. Who are the electors? They can be anyone not holding public office. Who picks the electors in the first place?
The Electoral College is a widely regarded as an anachrosim, a non-democratic method of selecting a president that ought to be overruledbydeclaring the candidate who receives the most popular vote the winner. Not only that, but a disputeover the outcome of an Elecotral College voteis possible-it happened in 2000-but it is less likely than a dispute over the popular vote.
Their are five reasons to retain, or keep the Electoral College. First, it's a certainty of outcome, the winner is everybodys president, it swings states, not only does ig work for little states, but for big ones too, and you can avoid run-off elections.
So those are my reasons why we should keep the Electoral College, we should not overlook the goods that the Electoral College does to our nation just because of two little bad that can be repaired. | 12
|
2c8ea49 | The face on Mars wasn't created by aliens, in fact it has no connection to alien life form at all! When the face was first discovered no one had really known much about it so people started hopping to conclusions before anything could be proven or tested. That is until NASA started looking into this "face on Mars". The face is actually a huge rock formation . . . which resembles a human head . . . formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth. That's it- simply a rock formation but the shadows casted upon the crevices gives the strange formation the appeal of a human face. When people began to become even more skepical, on April 8, 2001, NASA had the Mars Global Surveyor draw close enough to snap another picture of the face. The day was a cloudless summer day in Cydonia. NASA's serveyor camera had taken a crisp photo of the face in highest resolution. "Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel." so you can discern things in a digital images three times better than the pixel size. So NASA, and the rest of the world, had a more clear and better picture of the face everyone was talking about. Although the face may seem strange, it could be a rather common landform for Cydonia. "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesalandforms common around the American West." Although this one may seem to stick out from the rest, it could merely be the shadows playing tricks on the human mind. "Scientists figured it was just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia, only this one had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh." The landform may very well be common around Mars, it's merely the shadows ghosting around the landform that causes it to look like a face! So in reality, there is no alien life form connected to this rock formation at all! | 23
|
dd45719 | The culture of the car has been coming to an end. With many people now choosing to have other forms of transpertation. Now in Germany they are making cities where they help banned car usage. In the romantic city of Paris,France they are now starting to banned cars due to the overload of smog. The city of Bogota,Colobia is having a special day where they banned cars and see the effect of now having cars for a day. The car usage is now being observed to do damage around the world and due to that now cities all over the world is now banning the car usage. This will help to have a healthier earth and healthier people. The benefits of banning cars is going to help everyone and even our beloved earth.
In Germany the people have made a city where they have given up their cars. The city I believe has a better way to maintain a healty and cleanier enviroment than other cities in Germany. The banning of cars has been a great sucess with now people using bikes or walking as their means of transportation. Even though car ownership is permitted,the problem is that there are only two places to park which cost about 40,000 dollars along with your home. The result of that actions is that 70 percent of people do not own a car and 57 percent sold the car to live in the city. One person states "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way" says Heidrun Walter. The citizens of this city have been feeling better about having no car you dont have the stress to have to drive you have the calm relaxing time by walking or biking. did you know that "passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe and up to 50 perecent in car intensive areas in the United States."The greenhouse gas has been a problem ever since the development of motor power cars. Now that we are able to stop it lets take that chance to help stop the greenhouse gas and to make cleaner and healthier cities.
The romantic city of paris is having a bit of a problem its that its beautiful city is now being coveres in smog due to the overuse of cars. now that Paris has enforced a partial driving ban to help clear the air they can't help to notice that when there are fewer cars being operated the smog begins to clear up. The smog has always been a problem for Paris it usually has more smog than in any European country. The article states that "Paris has 147 micrograms of perticulate matter (PM) per cubic meter compared with 114 in Brussels and 79.7 in London,Reuters found." The romantic city of Paris cant be as wonderful if it always has a problem with having too much smog I believ that the cars are the ones to blame for this matter that if the city of paris bans its cars that the smog will decrease and become a the romantic city that it is. The article states that "diesel fuel was blamed since France has a tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline. Diesels make up 67 percent of vehicles in France compared a 53.3 percent average of diesel engines in the rest of western Europe." That means that it is in fact the motor cars that are the ones causeing the overflow of the smog. If the the cars are able to to be banned in paris we will see a drop in the smog and Paris will return to the romantic city that it is.
The city of Bogota,Colombia has been celebrating the day without cars for over three years straight. The car free day help leave the streets of the capital city without any traffic jams. One problem of the road that many countries have in their capital city is that they have to many cars because of the tourist and the huge number of people who live there which causes traffic jams leaving cars in the streets for hours on end. They have the same problem in Brazil where they have one of the worlds worst traffic jams in history. The ones who delevoped the car free day was trying to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. Someone states in the article "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution" says businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza. The stress of having a car in a countries capital can be stressful to some people and that bikeing or walking is a way to help calm someone after a busy day at work. Due to the car free day the city states that "uneven, pitted side walks have been replaced by broad,smooth sidewalks, rush hour restirictions have dramatically cut traffic."The car free day i feel is benefitting everyone from getting rid of traffic jams to clearing up the smog. The replacing of cars for bikes and walking is not so much a bad idea if it will help benefit evryone around you.
In conclusion, the car culture is now coming to its end. That nations all over the world has seen the great benefits from banning cars. The greatest effects that banning cars has is that they are helping to get rid of air pollution,stress,and the grreenhouse gas. These are all benfits for everyone it helps the ither people beside u and the environment. The romantic city of Paris was covered in smog due to cars. In Germany where they have developed a city where there is no car in sight and has everything within a walking or bike distance. The city of Bogota,Colombia making a holiday that has been going on for three years straight to have no cars for a day. The people have been seeing that the effects of having no car is wonderful and that we should all do it to better ourselves and to better out enivornment. | 45
|
65b060f | My opinion on driverless cars is that they dont have enough support and they are not something that is necessary for our society. I dont think we need driverless cars, because they would cause too many problems and be too much work to take care of. Driverless cars should not be a huge focus in our society, because we do not need them and we should be focusing on being more productive. We should not focus on driverless cars but rather on the safety of the cars and roads we have now.
Driverless cars could be more dangerous than the dangers we have now, revolving around the cars, traffic, and raidlroads all around us. We already have too many problems involving cars that we don't need to add any more. The people who are involved in creating the driverless cars should focus on making sure that the railroads are safe before trying to come up with anything new. I think that creating theese new cars is already to much work. It would involve creating the sensors, changing the breaks, and making new computer hardware and software. Theese things will not protect us from getting into accidents or having cars crashes which should be our main focus.
Even though they are taking away the concept of people having to drive the cars they are not preventing anything that could happen or that needs prevention. People may think that having a driverless car would keep them from having to do the work themselves. Whn really what would happen is that they would have to pay more attention to everything around them, which would cause even more work. The cars would need to supervised more than they do now, because they would be moving and need us to take on more responsibility in controling the car. This could end up not working, because the cars could end up going out of our control. Which could cause more problems for us. | 23
|
ad0e889 | Luke said he had only worked two jobs before in his life and they were at a gocery store and a bank. He never knew he would get a chance for a job like this. It states that Luke knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime. He might have never got to do it agin. It also states that the cattle boat is an ubelievable opportunity for a small town boy. He couldn't say no.
Luke caring for the animals has kept him busy. He has to feed them and give them water two times a day. The animals food has to be kept in the bottom of the ship. Luke had to make sure the stalls are clean. Luke had to work hard for this job.
Luke had to do alot of work but he also had fun. It had opened up a world for Luke. He states that he is gratefull for the opportunity. It states that the cowboys played baseball, vollyball, table-tennis, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and some other games over time. Luke has learned alot of this job and hopfully keep learning of this job. You can have an important job and a fun job all at the same time. | 01
|
e5565a7 | Dear Mr. Senator,
My name is Jacob and I would like to discuss with you some of the problems with the way the presidential election works. I believe the system using the Electoral College is unfair and can have its negative outcomes. In my opinion, the President should be chosen through the popular vote. There have been several times to date where presidents have one the popular vote but still lost the election due to the Electoral college. Often the President will have won by both Electoral votes and the popular votes but that isnt always the case. The electoral which has 538 electors are people as well. What is to stop them from voting who they want and not what the popular vote says in that state? They are people that are put in a position of power to choose who the next president will be. The obvious choice would be for them to pick who they want as president. Voters may also get confused about how the system works. They may thinkn that their vote doesnt count, that only the electors votes count. I believe that using a system where the popular vote is what chooses the election. This can solve several problems such as confusion and biased electors. If people felt that their vote counted, they might even want to get more involved.
Sincerely,
Jacob | 23
|
6c84f16 | Dear Mr. Senator,
I think that we should keep the electoral college. It provides winner take all method, it avoids run-off elections, and there is a certainty of outcome. I feel that the electoral college is not anachorism because it belongs in the present to.
First of all the electoral college should stay because it provides a winner take all method. The winner take all method is getting a swing state. A swing state is good to win because people in toss up states pay close attention to the election. They actually listen to the canidtes and what they are speking about. They are known to be the most thoughtful voters on average.
Secondly the electoral college should stay because it avoids run off elections. The electoral college makes sure that no canidate recieves a maajority of the votes cast. If no one wins a majority of the votes cast then it would add pressure to the election because it would greatly complicate the presidential election which is reduced by the electoral college. If it wasnt for the electoral college then half of the people like democrats of texas and republicans in california wouldnt vote because their votes dont count.
Third of all the electoral college should stay because it provides a certainty of outcome. A dispute over an outcome is possible but not certain that you would win. But on the other hand a dispute over the popular vote is more likely to win. The reason for that is that a winning canidates share of electoral votes exceeds his share of popular votes. A tie is possible due to the total number of votes being 538 but it is very unlikely.
In conclusion I think that the electoral college should stay because it provides a winner take all method, it avoids run off elections, and it provides a certainty of outcome. I hope that the electoral college stays in the election process forever. | 23
|
2e6c099 | What is the Face on Mars? Is it an extraterrestrial being or form?
The Face on Mars is not something alien like, it is not an Egyptian Pharoah, and it is not anything other than a simple rock formation that was shaded as though to look like a face by coincidence. It is a landform. As a matter of fact, it is much like those you can find here on Earth, and it is normal as you and I.
How would finding an ancient civilization on Mars be something we would want to hide? It wouldn't! In fact, it would be amazing if we could discover something so wonderful. Defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars (5). If we were able to find something so incredible as that, it would be very beneficial to the NASA program. There's absolutely no reason to hide something so intriguing and beneficial from anyone!
Now, I see where the confusion may come in. When the first picture was captured back in 2001, it seriously resembled a human head! Sadly, the sensation of finding something new lasted only for a short period of time, because it was soon ruled to be just another rock formation, common enough around Cydonia (2). Shadows can do funny things, just like they did in this situation. For a short period of time they had us believing that perhaps there was something to be found on Mars! We went to Cydonia three times, and I promise you there is nothing out of this world about the Face on Mars.
So, you might be wondering what was found on those trips back to Mars. Well, let me tell you. On the second trip back to Mars to capture another picture of the Face, it was found that it was simply, like I said, a plain old rock formation (7) . Since some people were not satisfied with the photo, we went back to take another one on a clear day,using the camera's absolute maximum resulotion, and got the best picture taken of the Face (8). The picture proves that the Face is no more extraordinary than some of the landforms we have here on Earth.
Now, I know there for a minute we really thought we had something. Too bad that after all the research was done, it turned out to be just another everyday kind of thing. I hope you realize now that the Face on Mars is simply a mesa, a rock formation, a land form, and that we have no reason to hide any discoveries or advances. Finding an ancient civilization would be wonderful. Maybe someday we will, but the Face on Mars is not it. | 34
|
fcc8652 | There are three reasons why you shoud join the Seagoing Cowboys program.
First you get to help many nations with food supplies and animals, like young cows, mules, and horses, to get over seas. Second you can see many places across the ocean. The Seagoing Cowboys have a lot of free time on their hands, so they can visit a lot of places. If the Seagoing Cowboys are in Venice, Italy you could take a gondola ride. Or if they are in Greece the Seagoing Cowboys could see the Acropolis.
The third and final reason why you should be a Seagoing Cowboy is you could do lots of fun fun stuff with other people. That stuff could be playing vollyball, baseball, table-tennis, boxing, or fencing. You could also do stuff on your own like reading or whittling
Those are three reasons, helping nations, sight seeing, and having fun with other people doing the same thing (or by yourself), are why I think you should join the Seagoing Cowboys. | 12
|
b7d7d61 | There are people all around the world that have decided to say no to cars and their polluting fumes. Certain places have even gone as far as having car free days. Limiting car usage will greatly benefit the Earth and the people on it.
Limiting car usage would help decrease some of the pollution in the atmosphere, which is definitely something that needs to be done. When a car is driven all of that gas has to go somewhere and with the amount that people are driving now thats a ton of waste that's polluting the air. Elisabeth Rosenthal presented the informaton that twelve percent of the greenhouse gas emissions in Europe are made up from passenger cars and fifty percent in the United States. Those numbers can be decreased if people choose walking, public transportation, biking, or car pooling instead.
Studies have shown that eliminating driving, or at least limiting the usage, has caused citizens to be less stressed. Heidrun from germany said, "I'm much happier this way,"(In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars,paragraph 3). Cars are very stressful so why should they be used if there are other options? Without cars people would be less likely to worry about loved ones arriving to a place alright and would just be happier in general.
To wrap things up, cars are dangerous, polluting, and stressful. Limiting their usage would help eliminate some of the risks and dangers of driving. There are many alternatives to driving, such as walking, car pooling, public transportation, biking, skating, the list goes on. Make the smart choice and use cars less. | 23
|
5656b7e | Wow!, many people suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it present. Venus is the planet that is the closest to earth. 97 persent of carbon dioxide blankeds the venus. Our sister planet is very inhospitable.
First, Venus is closest to earth. They also says the venus is the seconds planet from the sun. They also says that the Venus is the brightest in the night sky light. In paragraph 1 says that" In our solar system, Venus is the second planet that is from the sun. Venus can be easly seen from the distance but save vantage point of earth".
Then, 97 persent of carbon dioxide blankeds the venus. When there is a lots of carbon dioxode blankeds it more challenging. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. The temperature on planet average over 800 degrees fahrenheit, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planets in our solar system, Mercury is closer to the sun but somehow the Venus is the hottest planet.
Next, Our sister planets. Astonomers are fascinated by Venus, Because it may well once has been
the most earth-like planets in our solar system. Venus still has some features that are analugous to those on earth. Then I think it mean that the Venus is like our earth planet, I wonder if there is a plant on Venus just like earth. NASA has one particular compelling idea for senting human to stusy the Venus.
In conclution, sciecties suggests people to study the Venus is worthy pursuit despite the dangers it present. They also say that Venus is closest to earth. 97 persent of carbon dioxide blankeds the venus.Our sister planet is very inhospitable. | 01
|
e5e6810 | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" There are many statements showing the reader that It is very dangerous on Venus and that it would be extremely difficult to land on the planet and succesfully stay safe while explore Venus. Not only are there negatives in the text about Exploring Venus, but there are also points on why it is a good idea to explore the planet.
One point that was provided by the text was that Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size, and sometimes distance too. This information might catch scientists attention as we are looking for more planets to live on. However the harsh weather on Venus might stop us from daydreaming about that idea. It was said that Venus has the hottest surface temperature and that Venusian geology and weather provide erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequest lightning strikes. Specifically to probes seeking to land on its surface.
As said before, Venus may very well have been a planet just like earth a while back. possibly covered in large amounts of water and home to life. In the text it was stated that Venus could our nearest option for a planetary visit, but, once again, Venus provides many reasons for us to stay put on earth. We have sent multiple spacecrafts to venus and none have survived. Very few of these spacecrafts didn't
even last more than a few hours. Not only that but Venus has a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide.
The author provided good points to spark a thought in the readers mind that we should put more effort and time into exploring Venus, but the counter evidence sort of blows it out of the park. It could depend on how the reader sees the world. If they are optimistic then they might find hope for exploring Venus. If not optimisic and relys on the risks and evidence shown to prove it is a bad idea, they might not. However the author provided tons of facts that would inform and educate the reader on this topic. | 23
|
32aedc2 | Changing The Future
Times are changing. Driverless car technology is being created, with slow and steady progress. The technology for these type of cars has only been developed over the last few years because of a lack of technology. There are several companies trying to develop these cars, but they're pretty much at the same step. Knowing how driverless technology works, who is liable for damages, and how it will effect drivers is crucial to the possible future use of driverless cars.
Driverless technology has to be understood by the consumer. If the consumer does not know how this technology works, it could cause some serious damage.
The consumer has to realize that driverless cars aren't completely driverless, the consumer has to know that they have to remain attentive while being in the driver's seat. "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." (Driverless Cares Are Coming paragraph 7). Without the realization that they have to be attentive, some bad accidents could occur.
Liability for the accidents caused by driverless cars has to be settled. The companies that make the driverless cars, or the driver, it is yet to be determined who would be at fault. The company for making flawed technology, or the driver for being in the car. "Still, even if traffic laws change, new laws will be needed in order to cover liability in the case of an accident. If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-the driver or the manufacturere?" (Driverless Cars Are Coming paragraph 9). This will be a huge issue if driverless cars do become legal. Driverless cars could effect the people in more way than one.
The effect of drivers in the future if cars become driverless. Their is a great possibility of issues coming with driverless cars, some subtle, and some severe. Also, who would want a driverless car if you still had to driver it? That does defeat the purpose of the name of the car. "Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?" (Driverless Cars Are Coming paragraph 8). Being occupied while sitting there is imperative. People will become bored if they have to just sit in the seat all day long. Companies have to come of with entertainment systems, but an issue with that is losing attention. While being in the driver's seat of a driverless car, being attentive is imperative. There may be situations where the car cannot handle it, and it requires human skills. "This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." (Driverless Cars Are Coming paragraph 7). There is a double whammy right there. Companies have to balance out occupying the driver and keeping them attentive; but there is no way to be distracted and attentive at the same time.
The risks involved with driverless cars are way to high for the potential payoff. The technology that is being developed might have a future, but in the near future, there is no way it'll work. Right now, they aren't even driverless cars, the cars still require a driver. Surely there will be progress on that aspec of the cars. Just simple knowing how the cars work is the first obsticle. Also, being able to figure out who is liable for damages between the manufacturer, or the driver of the car is a huge issue that comes with this. Lastly, how it will effect future driver's skills, and attentiveness while driving. Will there be a future in this industry, or not? Only time will tell. | 45
|
246c469 | Have you ever thought the ''Face'' was made by aliens? The ''Face'' Is not made by Aliens. The ''Face'' Is A Natural Landform. On May 24,2001-twenty-five years ago something weird happened around Mars. NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft was snapping pictures of possible landing sites for its sister ship Viking 2,when it spotted something that looked like a face.
An enormous head seem to be staring back at the cameras from a region of the Red Planet called Cydonia. Scientists thought it was just another Martian mesa,common around Cydonia. In paragraph two it states,'Only this one had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh'.The ''Face on Mars''has since become a pop icon. It has starred in a hollywood film,appeared in books,magazines,radio talk shows ,and even haunted grocery store checkout lines for 25 years!
In paragraph five it states,"Some people think the Face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars and evidence that NASA would rather hide,say conspiracy theorists". Defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars. On April 5,1998,Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time. Micheal Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera(MOC) team snapped like 10 pictures. In paragraph seven it states,"When the image first appeared on a JPL web site,revealing ...a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all". | 23
|
65fc8bb | Do you believe that Smart Cars are positive or negative to aspects of driverles cars? Some people believe that Smart Cars are a negative because was if something happens to the technology who is going to be responsbile the driver or the manufacturer. Although ,I would have to say Smart Cars are a postive, because the Smart Cars would have sensors, and speeds up to 25 miles per hour, and the Smart Car is controlled by technology so the car can control itself through accidents , break itself, amd through work zones. Adding to that, the Smart Car lets you know when there is a problem accuring and it gets your attention.
First, Smart Cars are a postive aspect to driverless cars because the cars would have sensors. The sensors would monitor the surrounding of the Smart Car. In the aricle its says," auto makers used speed sensors at the wheels in the creation of antilock breakes. With in 10 years, those sensor have become more advanced to detect and respond to the danger of out-of-controll skids or rollovers". The sensors are placed everywhere aound the car such as:on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, and 4 automatic radar sensors etc. Meanwhile, those are just some of the places.
Next, the Smart Cars can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 miles per hour. In the article it says, " But special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel. In facts, non of the cars developed so far one completetely driverless. With that being said, the Smart Car isn't completely driverless, the driver is still driving just not the entire time. The driver is needed when pulling in or out of a driveway. Also when there is an accident or a problem.
Then,since the Smart Cars are controlled by technology, the car can control itself through accidents,break itself, and throught work zones. The Smart Car also lets the driver know if there is something wrong . In the article it states, "They can steer, accelerate, and break themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents. This means the human drivers must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires. The necessitaties the care being ready to quickly get the drivers attention whenever the problem occur. GM has developed driver's seats to vibrate when the vehicle is in danger of backing into an object.
Finally, Smart Cars, are a postive aspect of driverless cars because, they have sensors, good breaks, and still need drivers to control them. Although, some people might think its negative because whos going to be the one responsible if the technology messes up the driver or the manufacturer, it would have to fall back on the driver and the manufacturer. The Smart Cars have been tested so they should be postive and smart aspect. | 23
|
9060375 | "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be imited by by dangers and doubts but should expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." This quote is by the author who is suggesting that studying Venus is worthy of pursuit despite the dangers it presents. "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" tells you about the risks of traveling to Venus, but how the exploration has value. The author could scare some readers instead of supporting his idea that Venus should be explored. The author does not support his idea well enough for people to be convinced that Venus should be explored despite the risks.
Venus has many challenges and dangerous characteristics, too dangerous for humans to travel and explore. Venus has a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets, and clouds of "highly corrosive sulfuric acid." The author states all these facts about Venus, and all of them describe a planet that is too dangerous to be explored. The author is not "supporting" his idea when stating these things, but he does support it when he states that Venus is the most "Earth-like planet in our solar system," because he is trying to get readers excited about exploring Venus. The author does not say these ideas enough for readers to find visiting Venus worthy.
The author suggests alternatives for traveling to the solar system, like hovering Venus, but these conditions are still dangerous to humans. We would only get limited insight if we did trial this idea. Also, researchers could not get samples of anything from the planet. The author also states that NASA is looking for other approaches like mechanical computers in the 1800s and 1940s, but the author also states that these computer may not be able to withstand the physical conditions of Venus. The author states these alternatives, but all of them have a down side that would not give enough information to the researchers.
The author does not give enough information about why we should take the risk of studying Venus. The author states many good insights about how our planet Earth and Venus are "twins", and how Venus has enough value to explore it. As readers, we see only the disadvantages the author states. For example, how hot Venus is, and how no human could possibly live if they went on the surface. Not only does the author state dangerous facts about Venus, he also states alternatives about how researchers could maybe find information about the planet. These altenatives however, don't satisfy what we want to figure out about Venus. If we sent people to hover safely above the planet, then we would only get limited insight. The author did not give enough supporting factors to the readers about exploring this dangerous planet. | 45
|
e28f77c | Seagoing Cowboys, a great program. It is quit an adviture. You should go take a look for your self. See all the cool trips we take. See all the fun advitures we go on. How we meet new people. Come along and you will see.
The Seagoing Cowboys is a fun a way to learn about Eroup and about the end of World War II. On the trips you take you see amazing things. When I went I had the chance to see Europe and China. As you go on this trip it does not just teach you about that country it also teaches you about hard work. You can also find a way to have a good time and meet new people. On thins ttrip you will find it is a good way to learn about how people had to live and how it was hard in 1945 for many people to live and have food, as compared to now when everyone is walking around with a iphone 6 and drinking starbucks with lots of food and money. It will show you that you have to work hard for what you want. That back then nothing was handed to you on a silver plater. If you go on the trip Seagoing Cowboys you will find that it may take a lot of hard work but it can also be fun. Mostly when you are returing form trips and there are not animals on deck with you. Evryone playes Baseball and Volleyball games in the mptey stalls where the amimals sleep and stay on the trips.
What I think is that everyone should get this cool opertunity to be able to go and have fun and see what life was like back in 1945. It would be a fun and cool trip to see what you had to do and how you had to work. If you take my advice you sould go on this trip and go live in 1945 for a little ad have some fun, meet new people, and see some new places. | 23
|
8cfbbc9 | Dear Senator,
It is my belief that there is something unfair about the electorial college. Shouldn't the voters opinions matter?
With the way things are running now, the answer to that is a big, fat, no.
If we, the voters, vote for a presidential candidate and he/she gets the popular vote, then we want he/she to lead our country. But with the electorial college, what you're saying is basicallly, "We acknowledge that you like this candidate, but we don't, so your votes don't count". But please Senator, correct me if I'm wrong.
Another thing that grinds my gears is the fact that, by voting for a presidential candidate, you also vote for 34 or so electors pledged to the candidate. What if one of those electors recently caused a scandal? How can i trust them?
One thing I can not stand is dirty politics. But dirty politics is all we, the people, have been exposed to recently. How can I put my trust in the government with scandals left and right?
If you can not trust that your votes will be taken into account, how can you trust the leaders of your country?
Sincerely,
A Concerned Floridian | 12
|
88c60a7 | You can't trust driveless cars. If you let the car drive you while you sleep you never know what can happen. It probably turn-off and mess up like another person can control your car whoever you got it from. You really dont know what can help while you have this car. It still couldn't obey road signs or handle poor weather conditions.
You never know the driveless car can start doing other stuff then what its suppose to do. It can still get into a accident when its driving by itself can hit any car because it basically have control over the car then. I really think you should just not drive them you better off driving yoself if anything happen its your fault not the car. What if the driveless go off without telling you then what ?
If sleeping and the thing try and warn you its going off then what happens ? You probably will be sleeping to good for you not to hear it. Cant trust all technology some of it will trick you and plus it requires alot of sensors. You have to put alot of things in it for it to be made so anything can really go wrong. This my opinion for driveless cars. Dont get me wrong this is very creative but anything can happen while its driving or you.
If they can make it and nobody complain then that will be fine. But at this
moment i dont really think that they are ready to be drove like give it some time they people that made it should rive it for aminute to see if its safe. Just really think they creative but shouldve waited awhile before saling it. | 12
|
2d01aef | The Electoral College is a process in which each person running for President has his/her own group of electors who are chosen by their political party. In my opinion I believe that the Electoral College should not be kept because,it's not fair that the citizens only get to choose who is their president and who his party choose as Congress, they should be able to choose who helps the president run the country. The President basically just signs the papers that can pass a law but the Congress helps say if the law should pass or not.
People should be able also to choose who they want in Congress beacuse, people want a Congress that they know and trust to help our country turn into a better place. Sometimes the Congress only do what they want and feel is right. The Congress that the party choose may also be people that they like and believe will follow how they feel which may not be how the citizen feel. I know 538 pepole are alot to vote for and add the president, mayors,and commisioners etc., but atleast we'd have the freedom to pick who we want to help run country and we'd also know they'd try and help make our country amazing. Even if it's part of the Constitution they can change it a little like they alot of other things in it.
In conclusion people should be able to vote because then we'd be able to choose,so they could feel better about knowing who is passing laws and fixing their country. I may be under age but, I know if I were allowed to vote I'd want to vote for who runs my country and who helps run it. | 01
|
cf1bac9 | Outside of Earth is a mystery to mankind. Slowly through the 20th and 21st centuries we have been exploring the space around us. A close neighbor, Mars, is one of the most famous sci-fi planets of all. Movies, books, etc. have been made based on Mars. Martians or even just plain old aliens have been the tall tale of our time, but could a discovery change the argument between aliens being fake or real. The Face on Mars is a turning point for all people. I am a scientist at NASA who strongly believes that the Face is just a landform on Mars surface because over time the picture quality has gotten better and has made the pictures of the Face come out clearer making it easier to see the definition of the shape.
The first sighting or picture taken of the Face was in 1976. The Viking 1 was circling the planet, snapping photos for possible landing sites for its sister ship Viking 2 when a picture was snapped of what looked like a human face. Regular citizens were shocked at the photo along with scientists. This picture as seen is very blurry. Definition of the landmark is not very clear and with that picture comes many questions; What is this thing? How did it get there? Why is it there? So many questions that no one could answer. So us as humans jumped to the most conclusive answer would could come up with and the answer was that it was made by aliens. NASA quickly turned down the accusation because there was no evidence supporting the idea. In the text the author said, "Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo." This shows how different the picture quality is between 1976 and 2001. Also many people were not satisfied with the picture eighteen long years after the Viking missions ended. So on April 5, 1998 the Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time. Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking pictures. Thousands of people wanted to see another glimpse of the Face maybe even a better one. The image appeared on a JPL web site, revealing a natural landform. After eighteen years of conspiracy it was proven that the Face was a mesa.
In conclusion the picture from 1998 is how I prove that the Face is just a natural landform. The picture quality has changed dramatically and has put conspiracy theorists in their place. I strongly believe that NASA tried to be on the peoples' side, afterall no one really knew what the Face was at first. As we continue on discovering our universe we will surely come across many inccidents like the Face and maybe one day the outcome won't be the same. | 34
|
f808998 | In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author explains that researching and exploring Venus is a risky challenge to do due to the dangers of it, but he says that it would be worthy to do it.
So the dangers of Venus is that each previous mission was umanned and that was for a good reason. "since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades" (Paragraph 2). The atmosphere of it is almost 97% of carbon dioxide. The clouds are made of highly corrosive sulfuric acid.
But even though that there are these dangers on Venus Astronomers are not going to stop with this. Venus must of had been like Earth once before in the solar system. "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth" (Paragraph 4). The planet has a rocky sediment, valleys, mountains, and craters that are on Earth today.
So the question is what are the choices that is going to both keep the mission safe and scientific productive? Well The National Aeronautics and Space Administration known as NASA has an idea to this solution. Since there is terrible conditions on the surface of Venus. The only was to survive is to be above the ground. So the idea is that having a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the landscape. Thus, even being above it would still be hot around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be kind of like Earth's sea level. And there would be plentiful solar power. And since sending elctronics there would melt it mechanical machines would withstand the dangers of Venus.
Overall, Venus is a dangerous planet and dangerous conditions. Thats not going to stop us to explore Venus. Our curosity drives us to do it. | 23
|
0d96a6c | Have you ever wondered what your life would be like if you did not have to drive as much. Maybe you didn't have a car at all. A small experimental suburb in Germany is tooling with the idea of a no car life style, along with many cities in the United States where a car is not a neccesity. Paris however has banned car usage all together, becuase of the amount of smog produced becuase of the automobiles. This could marke the end of car culture across many countries, exspecially the United States. There are many advantages to not owning or using a car, some of them may just cause you to get ride of your car.
A small suburb in Germany on the France and Swiss border have given up on their cars. "Street parking, driveways and home garages are generally forbidden in the experimental new district on the outskirts of Freiburg." The streets of this small town are car free. The twon offers a tram that runs through the downtown, and a few small streets on one edge of the community. The town cannot bain cars altogether, but if you own a car the only place to store it is in large garages at the edge of the town. One space can cost $40,000, the cost of the space comes with the home. Only 70 percent of the population in Freiburg owns a car and 57 percent sold there vehicle before moving. Germany isn't the only country with this type of movement. The United States is promoting "car reduced" communities. This will cause increase demand of public transport to the suburbs surrounding big cities such as Chicago and New York.
Paris, however, is the first city to prohibit driving altogether. "After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial drribing ban to clear the air of the global city. Drivers where asked to leave their cars at home or risk a fine of 22 -euro ($31). Almost 4,000 drivers where fined. Diesel fuel was blamed becuase France has a tax policy which promotes diesel fuel. Almost 70% of drives have diesel vehicles. Delivery companies complained of lost revenue, but exceptions where made for hybrids and electric vehicles. The public transit was free of charge during the bane.
"President Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emission, unveiled last week." American now is has fewer car sales, people driving less, and there are fewer and fewer liscences each year. Americas love of motor vehicles seems to be subsiding. People are driving about as much as they did in 1995 which is 9% lower then the peak in 2005. Some people may blame the lack of cars and driving on the reccession. On the other hand people were buying less cars two to three years befor the reccession even hit. If this pattern presists sociologist believe it will be eneficial for cabon emissions and the enviorment. This is becuase transpertation is the 2nd leading cause of carbon emission. This could have negitive effects on the automotive companies but they are already rebranding themselves as mobiltiy companies. This allows them to have a broder range of personal vehicles. Cities like New York have established a bike sharing program. This allows people access to bikes accross the city instead of taking a taxi. Many of the young people accross the country have not even bothered to get driver's liscenses. Driving decreased by 23% between years 2001 and 2009. They instead plan activites where they can walk or ride a bike.
The age of the car may be coming to an end. Communities have started promoting a car free life style. Made othe ways of transportation avaliable. The younger people in the community have quit driving all together. Wether becuase it is good for the enviorment or a choice they had to make becuase of the city they live in. Transpotation is evolving into a public affair, not a personal one. The automotive industry may take a hit but in the long run this could be beneficial for our planet. There will always be car buffs, but sooner rather then later, you may not own a car altogether. | 12
|
c34313f | Many countries and cities have cut down the usage of cars because of the pollution that they cause. Some countries created days dedicated to not driving cars, and if someone violated this, they would be fined. Some people accepted this and embraced it, while others did not like the idea of not being able to drive at all. That was why when Paris forced a driving ban, almost 4,000 drivers were fined according to the article "Paris bans driving due to smog" by Robert Duffer. They did this because they are the city in Europe with the most pollution. But actually, not driving has many advantages that help you and your city.
One advantage to not driving is that it reduces a lot of stress. And it also helps clear all the traffic off the streets. Many places are trying to make things closer together and easier to get to, to encourage walking over driving, Andrew Selsky mentioned in his article "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota." He also mentioned that "parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks..." So this has caused the people in Bogota, Colombia to love walking no matter the weather.
In the article, "The End of Car Culture" by Elisabeth Rosenthal, she mentions that America's love of cars has decreased a lot. She also has stated that "a study last year found that driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009". People are now car-pulling or walking. Car sales have decreased as well. In some cities like Vauban, Germany have cut car usage all together and are completely car free as mentioned in the article "In German Suburb, Life Goes On without Cars" by Elisabeth Rosenthal.
In conclusion, there are far more advantages to not taking car then there are disadvantages. It is important to cut back the usage of cars to cut back on pollution in the world. Many countries have already done so, which has only been very beneficial for them. People are happier and less stressed out, the air is clean of harmful fumes. Which is why it is so beneficial for more countries and cities to cut back on the use of cars, so people can be more happy and healthy. | 12
|
0fcc1b3 | Companies should stop the development of driverless cars. I believe there should not be driverless cars because they are no safer than or better than people driving the cars. If there are driverless cars there may be more accidents, the driver won't have complete control so they cannot try to prevent accidents from occuring, and people still do not know who to blame for when an accident does occur.
Driverless cars may cause more accidents to occur. They may cause more accidents because the cars cannot sence or see everything around them. People can see when someone is backing up at the same time as them in a parking lot and know to wait their turn, but a driverless car cannot.
The car may also not be able to know if a car is backing up in front of them or not. The article mentioned that in a driverless car the car will let the person in the car take over if need be. The problem with this is that the person may not be paying attention and may not take the wheel in time. This would then result in an accident since no one would be driving. Another thing is that driverless cars cannot see everything. They do have sencers, but the sencers could fail. If this were to happen then the car would not know about anything coming towards it or anything that could possibly be in the way. It would be like a drunk driver.
Another reason there should not be driverless cars is because the person in the car will not have complete control. This is a problem because then they will not be paying attention. It is mentioned in the article that drivers will probably get bored. Being bored may result in falling asleep, which will then run into the problem of accidents again. This is because the person will not be able to take control of the car in time if need be. In the artilce they mention that the passenger still has to be holding on to the wheel. With this in mind it seems that it would just be easier for the passenger to drive themselves rather than a car drive them.
Lastly, no has decided on who to blame if an accident were to occur. The do not know if the car manufacturer should be blamed or if the passenger who owns the car should be blamed. This is a big question because if there is an accident, liability has to be covered. It is especially important to know who to blame in an accident if someone is injured. Some might think it would make more sence to blame the passenger because they were in the car when it happened. Others would blame the car manufacturer due to the fact that they made the car and the passenger was sitting in the car without any control.
It may seem that driverless car are the way to go but they are really no better than what we have today. If anything they may be more dangerous. I believe there should not be driverless cars because they are no safer than or better than people driving the cars. Driverless cars may cause more accidents, people will not have control over the car, and there is a big question on who to blame for an accident. So while it may seem like a great idea and alot of fun, driverless cars shoud not be developed because they are dangerous. | 34
|
910d63d | Everyone knows that a teenagers emotion can change very fast .Some people know that If in a bad mood it can affect how us students do our work. I think its not a terrible idea to have facial recongition to access our emotions.
First, I think using technology to access our emotions is a smart idea. Teachers often pick on the students who dont seem to be paying attention to what he or she is saying but what if that kid that they call on is just having a bad day? well with this technology they can tell if their students are sad or mad or even surprised .
To continue, I also see why people would argue why it is not a good idea. Maybe the technology will glitch and cause error. People also might say that the technology is reading enough of our emotions, and should include more emotions to read. Maybe it doesnt read some important ones like disgust or surprised. I would like to argue that even though it may not be able to read all of our emotions yet that they might be able to come up with ways to read more of our emotions in the future.
Secondly, I think it would be a greater and easier way for teachers and classmates to come in touch with their students and be able to support them when they are in need. I also think if schools began to use them less students would be bullied because knowing everyone else can read the bullies emotions will not help the bully and he will begin to stop and realize what he is doing to himself and his peers. I think using this technology will help with bettering our world.
to continue, I think people would disagree with me becsuse our world has a lot of problems with technology and should try and reduce how much technology is being used nowadays. Everyone uses technology to communicate with each other and now letting technology tell us everyones emotions can cause a lot of damage to our new world. It would take away our sempathy and empathy we have for people as we communicate with them about how they feel and using technology to tell us how someone feels is taking away the point of even talking about it because everyone already knows.
Lastly , I think getting this technology will help better our schools and help better our technology. Many things could go wrong with technology but with schools helping and participating giving the creator feedback on how it is working and what needs to be better about it. I think if enough schools participate in getting this technology we will come into better understanding with technology and each other. Thats why I think using technology to read emotion in school is a good idea. | 34
|
07845e1 | What do you think the face on Mars is? A natural landform or made by aliens? Most people think the so called "Face on Mars" is formed by aliens. I believe otherwise because, landforms on Earth are like that and these assumptions are made by conspircy theorist not by NASA officals. now here are my reasons.
The face on Mars is made by natural landforms and not by aliens. One thing of evience by a picture by Mars Global Surveyor, in paragraph 7 it says "...anxious web surfers we're waiting when the image first appeared on the JPL web site, revealing...a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all" That's a big piece of evidence that it's not made by aliens. Also, my second piece of evience that supports that the face on Mars is not made by aliens in paragraph 12 is "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the Amerian West". "It reminds me most of the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho," says Garvin. "That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars." That's my first reason I believe that the face on Mars is landform made.
The fact that conspriacy theorist make the assumption of the face on Mars is made by aliens. You have to understand that those remakes are not all true they are just theories which is just provided by evience but, not always right. In paragraph 5 it says "Some people think the Face is bona fide evidence of like on Mars-evidencd that NASA woud rather hide, say conspiracy theroists." "meanwhile defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars." That evidence was never what NASA said that's conpiracy theorist said and it's not true. So, mark these words and think about your decision, i think you should change you're mind about the alien theory to a natural landform with this information.
The "Unmasking the Face on Mars" from the evidence is that it's a landfrom instead of aliens making these faces on Mars. Don't always go by what the internet or media says, go by what real experts say. Maybe, you people that think that it's made by aliens I hope my reasonings and evidence is strong enough to change you're mind. Now what do you think of my evidence did it change your mind? | 34
|
eb8ed2d | Experience of a Seagoing Cowboy
Imagen being a cowboy but not on land, on sea, taking care of animals and going to many beautiful places. Its called being a Seagoing Cowboy. Sign up right now and help lots of people and have the experience of a life time. You will get to learn about the animals and take care of them, have lots of fun, and experience many unique places.
First of all, you get to take care and learn about the animals there. Some people might not like the fact that you have to stay in a boat several weeks with the animals. But after taking care of them and feeding them its not that bad and they become your friends. I had to feed them and water the animals two or three times a day. The stalls where the horses were kept also had to be cleaned. Not only do you learn to take care of the animals but you also learn responsibility.
Secondly, you have a lot of fun. I get that some people think being stuck in a boat isn't fun at all. Some of the most fun was when the animals were unloaded so the return is one of the funnest parts. The cowboys played many games and sports where the animals were housed. They would have volleyball games, table-tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, all which helped pass time. Go try it, who doesnt like an advanture, and some new friends?
Lastly, you get to experience so many unique places. I understand that some people might not want to leave their home. But, I had the benifit of seeing Europe and China. Another one of the coolest things was the Acropolis in Greece. I got to do many things like taking a gondola ride in Venice, Itay a city with streets of water. I saw many things and went to lots of places just imagen everywhere you could go and everything you would discover if you gave it a chance.
You get to learn about different animals and take care of them, have lots of fun, and experience many unique places. Sign up and have a great time maybe even the time of your life. When you sign up think of all the people your helping. It's a great opportunity after all being a Seagoing Cowboy isn't too bad. | 23
|
9b3fd14 | Starting with the end of World War II, cars have been a cultural hub all around the world, with businesses and even entire economies relying on the production and sale of cars and car products. However, after over sixty years of a car based global economy, the use of cars is beginning to slowly decline. With the decline of car usage, we see decreases in greenhouse gas pollution, a more relaxed living style, and the dawn of a new era of culture and economy around the globe.
Several major cities around the world have attempted to lower car-use through laws or even annual days devoted to reduced car-use. In Vauban, Germany, seventy percent of the population does not own a car, and fifty three percent of that population sold a car to move to Vauban. Vauban has condesed its suburban layout so that everything is within practical walking range for the most part. They have also discouraged car-use by making parking only available in two places, "Car ownership is allowed, but there are only two places to park-large garages at the edge of the development, where a car-owner buys a space, for $40,000, along with a home" (Rosenthal, paragraph 2). Vauban has reported drastic reductions in greenhouse gases. Passenger cars are responsible for twelve percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe, and up to fifty percent in the United States. The Environmental Protection Agency in the United States is promoting "car-reduced" communites in order to cut down greenhouse gas emissions, and legislators are acting on the issue. Experts claim that public transportation is beginning to play a larger role in suburbs, and a larger budget is now being given to public transportation instead of highways. Paris also has reduced driving to reduce smog, but they did it through laws. After suffering record-breaking pollution, Paris enforced a partial ban on driving. On Monday, even-numbered license plates could not drive, or they would be fined twenty two euros, or about thirty one dollars. On Tuesday, the same thing applied to odds. From this driving ban, congestion was lowered up to sixty percent in the French capital. Throughout multiple global cities, these reductions of car-use have had a significant impact on greenhouse gas emissions, and more cities are beginning to join in.
Along with the benifit of reduced greenhouse gases, car-reduced societies also have a more relaxed living style. In Vauban Germany, citizens have claimed that they are enjoying a more relaxed life with much less stress. Heidrun Walter was quoted in Elisabeth Rosenthal's article "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way" (Rosenthal, paragraph 3). Andrew Selsky's article on car-free days in Bogota, Colombia also states that people enjoy the relief of less stress when they don't use their cars. "'It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution' said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife" (Selsky, paragraph 24). If a drop in car-use leads to a happier, healthier life style, this will most likely set off a cyclicle action of car-use reduction to relief of stress and back to car-use reduction. As more people realize this potential benifit of reducing car-use, more people will beginning to join the population of reduced car-use.
The vast empire of cars that began with the end of World War II has reached its peak and is beginning a steady decline. For nearly seventy years, cars and car products have been a cultural and economical stimulant in both developed and developing countries. From the Model-T to the Buggatti, cars have been percieved as the thing to have over radios, television, and other mass media. Now that they are becoming less used, culture will slowly begin to shift to a different source to hype about. The production of new models of cars and new types of cars will slow and eventually halt all together. As well as culture evolving to a new phase, economy will also undergo major changes. Economy all around the world has been stimulated by auto industries, and international trade has been influenced heavily by it. For example, foreign cars are driven in America more often than domestically-manufactured cars. Now that car-use is declining, the economy will suffer a major crash in stocks in the auto industry. Although this crash will harm the economy, the ever-changing population of Earth will quickly find some new innovation to obssess over and the market will quickly recover and improve on this new product. With a new culture and economy, the world will be in a new era, a new age of living.
With the decline of car usage, we see decreases in greenhouse gas pollution, a more relaxed living style, and a possibilty of a new era of culture and economy around the globe. As the problems with cars are found, people have and will continue to resolve the problem by reducing car-use. The Earth will become healthier with a nicer atmosphere, the population will lead happier lives, and culture itself will transform with the end of major car-use. | 45
|
7bede28 | Autonomous cars are making a statement; who wouldn't want to benefit from a self-driving car? Autonomous cars can really change the way of everyday transportation; however, this can also be a bad thing. Changing a part of our daily lives could really be a hassle, but a self-driving car could help in so many different ways. Safety is a key issue here, but autonomous cars are built with safety as the first thing in mind. Techonology and engineering are key to these cars, and we've reached a point in time where almost anything is possible.
I am for the development of autonomous cars. However, I believe they should still require human skills to be driven. Technology fails at times, so that's why I am more for semi-autonomous cars. Humans are capable of so much intelligence, and with modern day technology advancing, semi-autonomous cars can really assist us in our day to day lives. If autonomous cars are a success, there should be restrictions regarding our safety and the safety of others.
Safety is a major concern with cars.
With normal cars, there have been times where a car company has had to recall certain vehicles with unnoticed, long-term issues. With autonomous cars, car crashes are nonexistent. According to the article, "Their [Google's] cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash..." Car crashes are one of the most awful experiences a person could go through. They are life threatening and killer. Car crashes could leave a person in fear of driving or simply sitting in a car. Not one person should have to go through that. It's not easy going through one; with car crashes being minimalized to nothing with autonomous cars, the roads are safer for everyone.
Since technology is improving, autonomous cars are looking better than ever. The technology included in a driverless car is very possible; however, it has not yet happened. Semi-autonomous cars have been a success - they allow easier driving with just as much awareness. Semi-autonomous and autonomous cars have the ability to save thousands of lives every year, maybe millions. Cars are built for a person's safety on the road - autonomous cars are no different.
In conclusion, I am for autonomous cars. Without a doubt, I trust the idea of semi-autonomous cars more than autonomous cars, however. There are pros and cons to an autonomous car, but an enormous pro of autonomous cars includes the major concern of safety.
According to the article, not one crash has happened with independently driving cars. Car crashes are life threatening, and not easy to go through. This is why I am for autonomous cars. More lives can be saved everyday, every month, every year. | 45
|
ece8404 | There are many reasons why you or anybody else who loves to explore and discover incredible places should join the Seagoing Cowboy program . It's not just helping other people , it's also about helping yourself .
One of the reasons is because of the opportunties you have to discover new places . This is a lifetime opportunity and we want you to join us . I have been to so many wonderful places like Greece , China , Panama and Europe . Imagine if you could get the chance to go there, would you say yes to the opportunity?
You don't just get to see beautiful landmarks but you also get to help people who's homes , cities and towns were destroyed and left in ruins. To them , for helping there homes recover you would be a hero . You can take care of animals when you are on seas . Those animals are shipped to the people who's homes were destroyed .
Thats not just what you do on the job you also get to mentally help yourself . I saw the poor families that lost almost everything during World War II . You will understand that you are lucky enough to have a strong and protective country that protects you from enemies . It made me more aware of people of other countries and their needs. And that awareness stayed with me, leading my family to host a number of international students and exchange visitors for many years .
You really won't find it boring because Don Reist and I came up with thing to do during trips. For example we played baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed after they were unloaded . We also played table-tennis tournaments, fencing,boxing, reading, whittling and other games that helped pass the time. You can also be creative and make up your own games .
I, Luke Bomberger, want you to come work with me because your helping me , people around the world in need , and your self . These are all the reasons why you should come work with me and my partners at UNRRA and the Seagoing Cowboys . I hope you can decide to come with me in this lifetime opportunity. | 23
|
8e90a33 | I know that this "face" was not created by aliens, because it changes over time.The MGS Viking 1 and Viking 2 could have caught pictures of what ever came back and changed it the other two times. If there were really aliens that created this "face", then there would have to be some kind of evidence.
Also
for more evidence, in paragraph 7 it states that, when the MOC flew over this "face" that there were not any signs that it was an alien monument after all. The scientist zoomed in alot on the "face" to see if there were any signs and nothing was found out or looked to be alienise.
According to the passage, "Scientists figured it was just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia...
The reason you may think an alien created is, because the way it resemables a face. While according to scientist the only reason it looks like a face is because there are shadows around the object allowing us to see,what we think is, a nose, mouth, and eyes. | 12
|
7209743 | This Face on Mars is not created by alien, it's just natural landform. If it's created by alien where are the alien? We have no prove, but i believe that this Face is just natural landform. We took a picture 3 times still there is no prove that alien created this Face. Do you even believe that there are alien out in the planet? Maybe but some people does, there might be an alien, but there is no way they are going to created that Face on Mars. If there is an aliens they wouldn't leave trace like that on Mars. We have been seeing this face form 1976 to 2001 still there is no prove. All we know is there is a Face on Mars. We doesn't know who created this face or where is came up form. Its just natural landform. NASA has been looking for it and take a lot of picture but there is not prove of who or what created. Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute macimum resolution. 2001n image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo. We look that close its there prove ? No! If you think this Face on Mars is created by aliens why did you stop looking information about it? There is no prove of an aliens created this Face. So its just natural landform, it created it self. | 12
|
b02d2d6 | Cars are like beneficial disadvantages; they allow you to arrive at your destination in a short amount of time, but they add to the world's pollutions growing issue. Individuals in every single part of the world own cars and millions of cars are on our streets and highways daily. Whether it is to comute to work or visit a friend in the next town over, individuals are constantly on the road. While cars do simplify our lives today, in the near future cars will become a burden, due to the amount of pollution they produce and the stress they cause upon individuals. Limiting car usage in all parts of the world will bring more joy and persistent smiles.
Cars play a dramatic role in the amount of pollution that is in our air today. Which is also essential for our survival. Limiting car usage will decrease the amount of pollution we have today and the disgusting greenhouse gas emissions. "Up to 50 percent" of green house gas emissions alone are caused by car-intense areas in the United States acknowledged by Elisabeth Rosenthal, in the article "
In German Suburb, Life goes on Without Cars
". Furthermore, in the capital of France due to "intensifying smog 60 percent" of the individuals were in a severe traffic jam explained by Robert Duffer, in "
Paris band driving due to smog
". The smog was caused by cold nights and warm days and the warmer layer of air enprisoning car emissions and pollutuion; pollutions being caused by over usage of cars, meaning car usage should be limited if not haulted all at once.
Individuals participating in events like Car-free day and living in towns like Vauban tend to be a lot more joyful and enthusiastic. "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way" said by an individual named Heidrun Walter, who moved to Vauban for a more jubilating experience. Cars add stress due to having to be stuck in agonising traffic and having to pay for ridiculous gas prices. Also, by limiting car usage you'll witness and hear more individuals enjoying themselves walking the street, and "the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drowning out the occasional distant motor." described by Robert Duffer, in "
In German Suburb, Life goes on Without Cars
". Evenmore so, by abandoning your vehicle at home you won't have to deal with enebidable traffic and "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution" brought up by Andrew Selsky, in source 3 "
Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota
". Carless stress-
less .
Before saying cars are benefitial think of all the disadvanteges that they hold. All the disadvanteges out weigh the advantages. Pollution no matter how big or small is a humungous issue that can be prevented little by little by limiting car usage. Also, limited smiles will become persistent smiles if you limit car usage across the nation. More smiles and less cars is the way to go. | 34
|
b84aaeb | The author does not back their idea that studying Venus is worthy of pursuit. The author only has 3 paragraphs that supports their idea out of 8. The problem the author has is that there is not enough reason to go to venus besides curiosity.
The main things fighting against the authors point are how unhospitable it is on the surface of Venus and that the only reason we would go there is to say that we did go to the planets suface.
The second paragraph states "each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours." The vary next paragraph then states "a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus." This very same paragraph also says that the temperature on the planet is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience onour own planet." The only thing that backs the author up is the three ideas they said could work in paragraphs 5, 7, and 8. The author states the reason for use to go to Venus is curiosity, but fails to tell us what the cost or the reward to fuel the want to go to Venus
The author does not give enough information to support their idea that studying Venus is rewarding enough with the many reasons the point to us using to much effort and resorces to get a good payout. The author does not give any facts that support their idea. That is why the author`s idea is not fesiblely supported by their effort to prove itself. | 23
|
55ac220 | Do you think we need driverless cars? The cars Google founder Sergey Brin makes would use half of fuel of today's taxis. All of the driverless cars today need a actual driver. There are both positive and negative things about driverless cars but, I think that they are not neseccary.
I perosnally think that driverless cars are not worth getting because you still need a driver incase of bad road conditions. Whats the point of buying that very expensive car if your gonna have to eventually drive the driverless car. Say your in a rush for work and your on the phone with your boss butting on eyeliner and then it happends... you run into roadwork and your hands are all occupied and then you don't know what to do. That is another reason because you can crash and it wouldn't be safe for you or for any other people on the road.
In conclustion I believe that driverless cars are not neseccary nor safe enough to drive. I can see were people would think its good idea because they are efficent and can be a big boost in technology but Its not worth the bad saftey issue it has. | 12
|
5316172 | If you ask me you've got to be out of your right mind if you let a car drive you . You never know what could happen while your letting this car take control . Very resently there have been multiple accidents occurring where a human has gone to sleep on the road while there '' smart car '' was in control and that was not very smart if you ask me .
First of all ,
I would never put my trust into a car all kinds of malfunctions could occur . In paragraph 9 it states in most states it is iilegal even to test computerdriven cars . Also as stated in paragraph 9 '' If the technology fails and someone is injured , who is at fault - the driver ot the manufacture . '' That statement there should not even have to be brung up . There's a red flag already .
Unless , I know that smart cars are 100 % safe , there aren't any red flags , and it has been tested and proved to be safe you will never catch me inside of one . Just think about it , lets say you and your family go on a trip that is a 24 hour long drive and you decide instead of going to a rest stop or getting a hotel you'll just take a nap inside of the car and let the smart car take control . And as you come upon roadwork the car can't read the road signs ; that would be an accident right there . This car isn't all that smart .
I feel as if no one should be allowed to drive a smart car just yet especially since there are problems still occurring . As I've already stated very resently there have been multiple accidents occurring where a human has gone to sleep on the road while allowing a car to take control . And guess what occurred ? ACCIDENTS . Do to the fact this car does not take on much of the duties humans are able to take on .
As stated in paragraph 10 '' Automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems ahead will be solved .'' For now in my opinion these smart cars are not safe enough to drive ; I give it about 4 -5 years then maybe automakers will have it all figured out . But until then I am ANTI - SMART CAR . | 23
|
b465af2 | Was there a man on Mars? Magazines say yes, but the scientists have continuously said no. On May 24, 2001, NASA's ship, Viking 1, found something on Mars that had the facial features of a human. Scientists have proven that the piece of rock thought to resemble a human face is no more than just a natural landform through unusual shadows, facts that have been talked about with many scientists, and images taken that agreed with the facts.
First of all, NASA stated that they thought this landform was just another mesa found on Mars. The difference was that this strange, possible mesa obtained humanly facial features. Later, the fact the that the "facial features" on the mesa were due solely to unusual shadows, which gave the untrue image look like eyes, nose, and a mouth.
Next, the fact that the mesa is only a natural landform, not a face has been confirmed with countless scientists. On April 5, 1998, everyone was waiting to see what decision would be released about the mesa. Was it once a face of a person or just another landform on Mars? It appeared on the JPL website that there was no alien monument; it was just a nautral landform. Scientists have confirmed this. The only reason that it is even questioned is because people wanted to have been able to say that there was a face on Mars, even if it was proven otherwise. There is much more publicity for authors especially to say that there was a face on Mars. Unfortunately, scientists know the most in this situation, not authors.
Lastly, scientists took pictures to prove their evidence. In September 1997, Global Surveyor took a photograph of the landform that was ten times better quality than the original Viking picture of the "face". People who are not scientists still disagreed, so NASA and other scientists continued to take images. By the time it was 2001, the mesa did not look like a face anymore. The picture shows that it is clearly just a mesa.
In conclusion, people would be crazy to try to attempt to disagree with the scientists because of how many facts they have to prove their hypotheses. First, they explained why the mesa only looked like a face because of the illusinating shadows. Then, they confirmed it with other scientists. And lastly, the scientists took many photographs of the mesa that finally proved their point. Scientists proved their point by explaining unusual shadows, confirming information with additional scientists, and taking countless photographs of the mesa. | 34
|
95ff8f8 | Every day, technology is becoming more and more advanced. From new games on a phone all the way to new advances in medical technology. Some people might even say that in the future, everything will be run by computers. Though, some of this amazing new programming, such as the Facial Action Coding System, is unnecessary.
Even though this programming is very cool and sounds like a revolutionary new thing, there are still a few problems with the idea. One problem being that a bunch of people probably won't agree to use it because of facial recognition databases and government conspiracy theories. Another problem is that computers are just computers and human emotions are much more diverse and complex than six basic emotions which happen to be portrayed differently by every human being. For example, in paragraph 6 it is stated that, ' "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," Dr. Huang predicts. "Then it could modify the lesson..." '. This, in itself, sounds like it could be super helpful to alot of students. However, computers do not have brains and can not think for themselves, and even though there is some super advanced software involved, modifying the lesson based on a student's face has alot of loop holes. Faking a convincing facial expression really isn't hard to do, so students could manipulate their lesson quite easily, keeping them from learning necessary things. Also, not a lot of students constantly enjoy their lessons so modifying the knowledge based on if a student looks bored isn't very smart. On the other hand, the article does say that, "The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive - for video games or video surgery." This shows that this type of software really isn't useless, it's just that using it to read students' emotional expressions isn't really a necessary thing.
To conclude, this type of programming could be useful if used in the proper way, but it most likely won't do too much for students. If students have found ways to get out of or cheat on homework before, then there's nothing stopping them from breaking the rules of this facial recognition software either. | 34
|
f559aba | Most likely im in a car every day of my life and the odds are so are you. But What if cars were never invented how many lives would be saved? how much money could we save? And over all how much better and cleaner our world will be. These things are just some of the advanatges that pertains to limiting our car usage. Have you ever heard of the good out weighs the bad? well in this situation the good defiantly out weighs the bad.
Our life source is breathing we need to breath air and at that fresh air, but we never are, not with fumes from millions of cars roaming around. Stated in (source3 par24) "Its a good way to take away stress and lower air pollution". That to me sounds like two gains already, whats better than fresh air and less stress. Things just as simple as car pooling makes the world better but what really would is not useing you'r car daily. No, i dont mean walk every where you could use bikes, eletric operated golf carts which are all fun but much better for the air. By useing these we have fewer fumes in the air which makes for better air. If we all began useing these instead of cars in just towns it would become normal to ride bikes and, golf carts rather than big bulky air killing machines. For an example in (source4 par29) "Americans are buying fewer cars and driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by". It just starts with one to make something drastically change. Now i know were not gonna take family bike trips all the way from florida to georgia or drive a golf cart that only goes to 40mph,but thats when it would be decent to make a "car trip". Im not saying stop useing cars completely just only when its not neccassary. Just think about the world you live in the world that God has created is being pulluted every day, but we can all change that.
Money, money ,money Seems to be the big talk in America weather its the money were making, the money were loseing ,or the money we just dont have. But Wouldent you rather put your money towards the mouths of your family or the roof over your head, rather than in your gas tank ? Useing less cars would give us more money on more important things in life and, would cause more people to become happier . Just by useing things like bikes can make things more smoother in your every day life for an example(source3 par28) "Rush hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic". No one i know loves sitting or, nearly wrecking during traffic with this mehtod of less cars we could cut deaths and, stress in half . And i know you would say, but millions of people would lose jobs big money by car usage being reduced,but think of all the new things they could make their money from . People are always looking for the next big thing , well this is it. Dealerships that promote this could now turn into safer mobility shops and, make nearly as much. Stated in(source4 par32) "Americans could not afford new cars and the unemployed wernt going to work anyway". This goes to show that were already leaning towards the idea of less cars we just need to be pushed. All the new inventions that will arise weather its cute bicycle covers to built in tops to block the rain people will be gaining and saving just as much. But what were really gainig is the saftey of people. Kids fall off their bikes everyday and probably get hurt but, a scrape is better than taking your last breath. We all gain from this , and our human nature is to want whats best for yourself, well this is surely better for every one.
Almost every day im in a vehicle, but maybe that could soon change. We could gain so much from losing just a little bit of driving time. We would absolutley gain lives,money,and happiness from useing less car usage. Im a firm beliver in useing this method i couldent imagine a better world of things going just so smoothly all of the time. But It takes getting on that bike or walking to the corner store to strike a revolution like this. So get out of your cars and, go make a better place for you and for the world. | 34
|
2fd5e11 | I will be taking about the Unmasking the Face on
Mars. I believe that the aliens did not find the face on mars. I say people found it on mars.
Mars is now Famous for the face.
The face was on mars. The face was a pop Icon. The evidence I have that it says that it was in Movies books Haunted grocery store. Thatfor I know it is a pop Icon. To Mars because nothing ever has been found on Mars because it is super hot to do anything on it and ut is made out of sand. So that for I know the face was there before the aliens found it. The Face was on mars because the title of the article is Unmasking the Face on Mars. If you read the Article you would now that. The face is important to Mars and to the scientist Becaus e this is the fist thing found on Mars. The Face will Stay on Mars as long as it does not get damaged some how or disform
I conclued that the face will be there forever and ever. The Aliens did not fine the face. I am so mad that the you think that the aliens found the face but they did not The scientist found it so think again because if the Aliens did found out that they did find it then we should say sorry to the Aliens for thinking that we found it. I say That we should discuss with our own sicentist to find out who found the face on mars. | 01
|
b42c291 | This article states that venus should still be studied further despite all of the danger that it brings toward the people and the equipment used to do so. The author supports this giving evidence and ideas. The author talks about the things that we have tried to do in the past that have failed and the ideas that we and NASA have for the future.
In part 2 the author states, "Each previous mission was unnamed, and for a good reason, since no space craft survived the landing for more than a few hours." Then the author goes on to talk about the new ideas and advances they have made such as, NASA came up with an idea of peering at venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet.
In conclusion I think that the author supported this claim very well. The way that they talked about in the article it made it very clear that they knew exactly what they were talking about. | 12
|
05182bf | Unmasking the Face on Mars. If I were to be a scientist at NASA discussing the Face with someone who thinks the face was created by aliens. I would prove them wrong, because there are many objects that have some sort of illusion in them. This story tells how the Face is just a simple landform which I believe it is. It's a natural landform because when astronauts were circling around the planet they found it to be a simple landform. Seeing new things that look just like human things can just be an illusion to our eyes, for example the red planet could have had the "Face" carved into it.
I think that there are objects that can always fool our minds especially planets. There are certain planets that give us many illusions and we just want to go and figure out why they make us have such an illusion towards nonimportant things. The image of the Face that was spotted in Mars first appeared on a JPL web site, which means that the image was first taken by NASA. I believe that aliens do not exsist still and there could have been no way that the Face was created by one of them. Neil Armstrong was the first astronaut to ever be on the moon and when he came back from the moon he left his steps on the moon. The Face could have been created by someone who has visited Mars (Red Planet) even though the planet almost is the same temperature as the sun they could have taken a pocket knife and began to crave in a human face.
The Face was spotted on Mars, but the certain place that it was spotted was a lava dome, what is a lava dome you may ask?. Well, a lava dome is a place that is isolated from a mesa and can be up the same height as the Face on Mars. There are still some scientist that believe that the Face was someting that aliens created when it could've been a person or even people that wanted to leave a trace left behind. Maybe they left a trace left behind because there probably wasn't anybody who has been there before.
The Face was spotted by NASA and when NASA spotted the face they made sure to zoom in on what looked like Face. I believe that the Face was carved or traced behind due to a human being there, even though they say aliens live in Mars there could be no way that a alien did a cetain thing. Aliens could not have been the ones who left the illusion of a Face because some studies show that aliens were not exsisting at that time. The story also does not state anything towards aliens being on a certain planet especially Mars.
In conclusion, I believe that things you leave on a planet can not always be something a alien did or has done. Our mind has such a great technique to play with our minds, especially if we see things from above like the Face was seen from above. I do believe the Face was just a natural landform. I believe it was just a natural landform because there are some things on planets that have such and illusion into them. | 34
|
32bf2eb | From the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" it describes many reasons about how venus is not safe, but once along time ago could've looked like earth. Venus also know as Earth's "twin" is very close to earth. Venus has very many reasons about why humans havent been on it in three decades. "no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours" which tells me exactly how dangerous it actually is.
"on the planet's surface tempatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit" which is extremely difficult to survive on. Imagine people from Earth going up to a place with 800 degrees Farenheit, no-one would make it out alive. Venus which "97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere" which to me as very deadly as well.
Having all this horrible enviroment, it "would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals." which in my opinion would kill anyone their. Despite how deadly Venus seems, scientist want to go visit it anyway because they believe humans and animals lived on it before. "Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like earth"
Since astrounauts can't take samples of rocks, gas, or anything else, from a distance is nearly impossible because of its conditions. Hovering in a ship above Venus is limited to ground level because you cannot seethat far. Also sense light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere.
From all about what i've learned i can tell that Venus is extremely difficult for any living thing. Since astrounauts haven't landed on Venus in three decades proves that its way far from safe. Being able to not get samples such as gas, rocks, or anything they will never be able to tell if humans lived on it long ago making me believe that Venus is beyond dangerous and should be avoided. | 23
|
87ce827 | Imagine, you are sitting in the class and there was a computer in the front of the classroom that can read the emotional expressions of each student. How would that make you feel? Trapped? Uncomfortable? According to the article, Professor Thomas Huang, of Beckman Institude of Advanced Science at the University of Illinois, and his colleague are developing a computer that can calculate emotions called Facial Action Coding System (FACS). The use of this in the classroom is not as valuable as it seem. Using this advanced technology could make the students feel uncomfortable in the class. It is also a waste of money for the school board to afford the computer for each class in the school. The computer is also not valuable because teachers would know how the students feel without the help of the computer, so there is not point.
First and foremost, using this technology would just waste money for the school. Knowing the emotion of each student is not what the school's main focus is. Even if the computer helped read emotions, what is the use of that? The student's emotion is not going to change just because there is a technology telling them how they feel. Most teachers already know how the students feel. The school should instead use the money to make the school a better place for students. For example, they could increase the budget on after school activities or make better lunch for students.
Secondly, having the Facial Action Coding System would just make students feel uncomfortable in classes. Students might be more focused on the techology that they were even more distracted than they were before. Having a technology that knows your emotion would also make the students feel isoloated and trapped in the classes. According to the article, the FACS on have six basic emotions. That means the technology would never be one hundred percent accurate. Some students might not even want to go to classes anymore because of the technology watching them during class.
Some people might say that using the technology would be better at reconizing the students emotion , but they are wrong. A technology that is created by human being can never be smarter or better than a human. This tecnology only have six basic emotions, but there are so much more emotions that it can not recognize. In the article, it stated that we humans perform this same impressive "calculation" everyday. The use of this technology in classrooms are very little bacause teachers would be able to recognize more enotions that a technology could ever have. Teachers do not have to know if the student is 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted or 6 percent fearful,as long as the teacher know the basic emotion the student is feeling.
In conclusion, Using the Facial Action Coding Ststem in classroom is not as valuable as it seems. The computer can make the students feel uncomfortable and isolated. It is also a waste of money for the school. They can use the money for better and more useful things. It is also not valuable because teachers already know how the students feel. Even though the tecnology is not valauble to classrooms, it shows what we are capable of doing and what we can accomplish. This can open up to more better and useful inventions in the future. | 45
|
6cd064e | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worhty pursuit despite the dangers it presents by explaining to the reader about how dangerous it is and how man kind hasn't been able to explor it using spacerafts to land on Venus. In the text in paragraph two it explains that "Humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped worls...each mission was unmanned...no spacecraft survived the landing for than a few hours."this eplains that exploring venus is a dangerous missin that man kind will do anything it takes to be able to explore it.
The author supports his idea of exploring venus by giving reasons on why it is good to explore it and by giving reasons on how hard it is to explore venus without good use of technology and understandment on the planet,in paragraph two the author explains on how no spacecraft has survived on venus for more then a few hours, on paragraph four the author explains that "if our sister planet is inhospitable...why do scientists discuss further visits to its surface...Astronomers are fascinated by venus because it once have been the most earth like planet in our sloar system." this is an explination on that exploring venus is dangerous but it may help us learn more about if there was another earth before us.
In the text the author claims that venus could have been a earth-like planet of the solar system long ago reaserchers or scientists and astronomers are fascinated by venus and wanting to explore venus do to the fact that it seems there was human life in venus long ago, in paragraph four the author explains that "Long ago, venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life." this is and example of what scientists would like to explore about venus to discover or learn that it could be possible that venus was once earth before ours.
Throughout the whole article the author explains and gives many reasons on why exploring venus is a good idea on the fact that we could learn from it, The author also states on how venus is dangerous to explore because we dont have the right technology to be save enough to land on it. even though venus is every dangerous to go to and explore with the right technology we could learn things we have not discovered about our planet, exploring a planet that could have been like ours a long time ago could give us many more things to learn about and discover. | 34
|
32edbd4 | My opinion, driverless cars are a good idea. There are less accidents using the driverless cars. The car will alert you reguardless if you're paying attention or not. It will vibrate your seat. Drivers are either on their phones, messing with the radio, or talking to the passengers. That's not a good thing. It will be if you have a driverless car, because like I said, you will be alerted. You won't be able to speed or get mad and frusterated because the other drivers or not going the speed limit. I know a lot of people that like to drive being on their phone or something. When they do that, they start to run off the street or onto the other lane. You don't want to panic when that happens. When you panic, you wreck. So, it will be a great idea to have a driverless car. It keeps everyone happy and safe. | 12
|
1240bc6 | Dear Senator,
I am writing to you about the debate on the abolishment of the Electoral College. I see absolutely no point in the Electoral College because all it is is elected people from a state voting on the president based on what the popular vote for the president was in their assigned area.
The Electoral College has 538 electors. The majority of them are from the states of California, Texas, New York, and Florida. Election Day is held on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. I don't see why we need other people to vote for us. The Bill of Rights said that we have a "freedom of speech", but our "freedom of speech" is given to other people to change around. We need to abolish the Electoral Congress so we can just vote for who we want!
The popular vote means that the president who recieved more votes claims that the state voted more for him/her. The popular vote goes to our "electors" and they decide to vote for the President. We should just vote straight up because the election in 2008 was a huge mistake. Obama decides to do whatever he wants. Insurance prices have gone up due to "ObamaCare", and now there is a huge, long, and exhausting process to get te see a specialist especially if you need to see one. It is out of control and he needs to do something about it.
We should abolish the Electoral College because its just a waste. All they do is tally up the popular vote, and say "OK, im going to vote for Romney since that's what my people want." Why can't we just vote for who we want instead of wasting our time! The popular vote should be the only way to vote. There shouldn't be a long and hard process to voting. If I go and vote, I don't want to have to know like 60 different people to vote for, I just want to check the box saying that I want to vote for 'so and so' and leave and go home. It is ridiculous about having a whole process to voting.
I hope this letter made up your mind on to vote
YES
for abolishing the Electoral College. When I get older and can start voting, I hope that I can vote for whom ever I want without being told that " You just voted for nothing because the popular vote when to '(other Presidential Candidate)'and they won so they get the state. | 12
|
9612d64 | Landform or a Lie?
The world has seen the "Face" taken by NASA a few years ago. Some people say it's a natural landform and some people say it's an alien creation. NASA has figured out that it's just a natural landform on Mars and nothing else. NASA haven't explored all of Mars and can state it's an alien creation, there might be more than just one and they all could be natural landforms. It might look like a really weird face from above, but NASA has already stated that it's a natural landform.
NASA has explored a lot of Mars, but not enough information to say it's an alien creation. They've just found one and it looks pretty like a huge face to some people. They might find more out there just like this and it's still and ordinary landform. On Earth there are a lot of these landforms around the American West. NASA has taken a picture in really high-quality camera to show that it's just a natural lanform there.
Before Amercia had these great cameras and computers, they weren't able to get a clear picture of the face. So people just assumed that it was an alien creation/monument. If they say it is where are the facts that say it's an alien monument. Later after all those years, NASA were able to take a maxium resolution picture and post it to the world. Thousands of people were waiting to see the photo, but when they did it was just a natural landform. There was no alien creation to see and observe at.
Although NASA has said it's just a natural landform, people state that sometimes NASA doesn't want us to know certain things. Some people say it could've been a monument created by an alien civilization on Mars. They haven't gone through all of Mars and know that was there or not. NASA might eventually find more of these landforms and study to actually say it's an alien creation. Conspiracy theorists state that the face is bona fide evidence and that NASA would hide them from us. The world doesn't know what's out there to say that it's this or it's that.
Since, NASA people say that it's a natural landform, people believe them. The "face" is nothing else than a landform on Mars, it's known to find some of these landforms around the American West. NASA has aready proven that it's just an ordinary lanform with a maximum resolution camera and posted it to the world to see. NASA has hid a lot of stuff from us and right now in this situation, people believe that they're lying to the U.S. Some people believe in NASA, some people in conspiracy theorists, but who knows what that "face" is. | 34
|
495a06b | i think technology that reads facial expressions of emotions of students in the classroom is not valuble. if a student is happy, sad, angry, etc they know what to do to make it change.
technology isnt always right anyways so if the computer reads that someone is happy and they are actually sad then nobody could help that student out. also if a student is confused they have to figure it out on there own or ask someone for help they know how to do that on there own and if there board then they can figure out what to do to get movin and to be happy instead of being board the hole time.
lets say we want to have computers to show the emotions that might be a bad thing like if your opening a present you got and you dont like it that could hurt that persons feeligs and make them sad. so no i do not think its a good thing to have computers tell our emotions. | 12
|
d842247 | The Electoral College. The system that our founding fathers had set for us to choose a leader of this country. It has been used forever and some poeple may agree that we should keep it. But others understand that we should change the voting system so that the election is more fair. I believe that the United States should no longer use the Electoral College to elect our president because I feel that we should have a more direct vote so that the person that most people actually want in office will be elected and so that all of the states can hear each candidates campaign so they feel like their vote actually takes part in the election.
To begin with, I believe that the United States should start to use a direct vote to choose our leader so that the winner of the popular vote actually gets to win and so that the peoples votes actually matter. It seems only fair that if you win the popular vote from everyone one in the country that you should win the race but with using the Electoral College the desicion will always vary. For example, during Al Gore vs Bush, Gore had over 60% of the nations vote. Most of the people wanted him as our acting president. But due to the Electoral College Bush ended up winning the election. If the people actually did have a say then Gore wouldve been elected because of the popular vote. When using the Electoral College your vote wouldnt be apart of the actual election. Your supposed to elect an elector to vote for you. So truly your elector has all the power because in the end they are the one choosing who your state has voted for.
Furthermore, the Electoral College shouldnt be used to elect our president because it makes it unfair to voters. With the winner-take-all system in each state the candidates dont spend time to try and campaign in all of the states because they think they have no chance of winning in that state. Every state should be able to see the campaigns for each of the candidates so they can have an actual choice. If campaigners spend most of their time focused on the swing states how would they know if they had a chance of winning over any other state that they thought wouldnt vote for them. For example, back in 2000 seventeen states didnt see any of the candidates or a single campaign ad. That is basicaly telling that state that their vote doesnt matter.
In conclusion, The Electoral College has major flaws in it that are easily exploited. The people dont get to vote for themselves, instead they put their vote in the hands of an elector who, in the end, has the final say on who the state votes for. Also the Electoral College, which has a winner-take-all system, excludes some of the states from actually seeing a candidate which makes it seem like their vote is irrelevant to the whole election. | 34
|
4c5ca34 | Dear State Senator,
My name is PROPER_NAME, and I beleive that America should change to a popular voting system. I believe this because nobody wants to have someone else to vote for them. With the pop. vote system, everyone will be able to voice their opinion, instead of X amount of senators deciding who they like. To me, it seems unfair to let 5 people decide what thousands of other people want. If you would, please let me present my evidence for a pop. voting system.
To vote, you must be 18,an adult. When your an adult, you dont have parents anymore to decide what is "best" for you. Having representatives "represent" the people, they are being the parents who try and control their childs life! We fought a war to become independent and let the people decide what they want, yet this "land of the free" is becoming less free every day. Letting the people vote will give us back a major part of the American dream.
Another reason is the ratio of citizens to representatives. In California, it is 35,000,000 being "represented for" by 55 people, who could be biased people who are can be choosen by "the states central party comittee, and even the
PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES THEMSLEVES
". That is like asking your closest friends( or sombody you payed, in the presidential candidate's case) if you or the lonely kid at school to vote who is most popular. That seems very messed up to me.
Finally, the 5 people that vote could be anti anything! In 1960, racists in the louisiana legislature( some of the "special" people who vote for who is a representative) tryed to instill new representatives who would oppose JFK. What if a woman ran for presedent, than a bunch of states instilled sexist representatives to ruin her chance of winning? What if another african american trys to run, but is shot down by newly apointed racist representatives? I sure an heck dont want me or my state to be represented by 27 racist/sexist "representatives".
All in all, our current system as major problems. People are not able to voice their opinion. Insted, we are letting a handfull of representatives speak their opinion,and say its what us normal people want. Not to mention, these are people that cant be apointed due to bias. Finally, the representatives that the biased people choose, in special groups of 55-3 people representing millions, can be anti whatever,or just not like the person for a stupid reason( for example "I dont like his haircut, its to short/he looks like a pedophile"). If you would, please consider my idea of a truly free america, or even spread my word to the people.Thank you for your time.
Sincearly, PROPER_NAME | 23
|
6e990ee | In a school, there are clasrooms upon classrooms that are all teaching different, new, and exciting classes. When walking down a hallway, it is more than possible that the sounds of logorithmic functions could be taught to your left as Shakespeare might be being recited to your right. If you take a turn, one kid may be leaving his photography class to go take pictures for the yearbook while another may be returning from the restroom to go back to her chemistry class where she is studying saturated and unstaurated solutions. Despite the intense differences and varities of classes that there are at a high school, not every one of them is "new", "different", and "exciting," as used previously to describe the classrooms scenes to all kids. Therefore, if it were at all possible that these kids could feel and want to be more engaged in their classes that take up a large portion of their week and youth, the way to do so should be evident in the classrooms. With this in mind, the idea that using Facial Action Coding Systems in classrooms would be valuable is not only true, but something that should be acted upon. (D'Alto).
In the life of someone that is attending school, there is one idea that is always looming over their shoulder. Whether it be like a cloud on a rainy day or a shadow following them on a sunny one, grades are always an important factor in a school-goer's life. Therefore, if this porgram would be able to help kids to be more interested in a topic and be more involved, they may just have improved grades from this system. In the text, the excerpt, "'A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming cofused or bored,' Dr. Huang predicts," shows that student's attention could be analyazed. (D'Alto, 6). With this being done, if the computer would be able to recgonize confusion, the student could then be introduced to a better way to learn the material or a way that they beter understand it, then leading to better grades. (D'Alto, 6). Also, the grades of the students could improve based on what the computer decides to do with as much human touch as it can. The passage, "'Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor,'" shows that there is a solution to any problems a kid may have with what they are learning. (D'Alto 6). The fact that the computer attempts to try and help the students with a human touch shows that it would have the capibilties to do it's best and help the students to learn better, overall improving the student's grades. (D'Alto 6). With both of these examples in mind, it can be seen that the inclusion of this sytem into classrooms would have the capability to improve both a student's grades and understanding.
When a kid is sitting in a classroom for an hour, atleast, every day to every other day, there is seemable reason as to why and how a kid could get easily side tracked and/or bored. Despite this being true, the inclusion of this program into student's lives may have the ability to greatly improve student's engagement and interest in the classroom. In this article, the author includes, "'Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional connection,' notes Dr. Huang. 'So computers need to understand that, too,'" shows just how the students may become more engaged and interested in their classes that take up so much of their week days. (D'Alto 6). If the computers would be able to connect with the students, there is no reason that these kids would not feel more obligatred to pay attention and more interested to learn what is being taught. (D'Alto 6). Another reason that these kids would gain more by having this system in their schools is the idea that would engage them in a fun manner. When the author included, "The Mona Lisa demonstration is really intended to bring a smile to your face, while it shows just how much this computer can really do," the reason is stated so in the text. (D'Alto 6). By including this piece, the author is showing that there, overall, is a fun factor to this could intrigue the students and keep them interested in their assignments and school overall. With these two ideas in mind, it can be seen that, as the attention of students is a primary need for schools, if this could improve just that, there is no reason not to include it in student's lives.
As science is an ever-budding field by it's own nature, there is no reason that a new technology wouldn't thrive among those interested in both science and technology. Therefore, as this is something that is new and up and coming, the addition of this to clasrooms may spark a pasion for this subject and inspire a career to form. In the excerpt, "The software is the latest innovation from Prof. Thomas Huang, of the Beckham Institute for Advanvced Science at the University of Illinois, working in collaboration with Prof. Nicu Sebe of the University of Amsterdam," shows just how recent this technology is. (D'Alto 1). With this in mind, if students were able to be introduced and subject to this technology, there could be future scientist that want to further improve this technology and, until then, would be more involved in it's place at school. (D'Alto 1). Also, due to the fact that this technology is not only limited to the classroom, it is then evident that other jobs could be produced out of this technology being in the classroom, sparking interest in young and vulnerable students. As the author includes, "The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive--for video games or video surgery," it is showsn just exactly how various the fields are that this technology could be used in. (D'Alto 6). Whether a kid is devoted to learning about medicne or engrossed in playing games, it has been shown that this technology in the classrooms would expose these kids to it's capabilities and potentially create a passion. (D'Alto 6). Therefore, by including this technolgy in the classroom with it's own purpose, the students would be subject to technolgy that is blooming in several fields and could easily inspire a child to become something that utilizes this technology in their future.
As kids are ever-subject to new and upcoming ideas, it is evident that the addition of recent techology could aid their progression in school and would be deemed as important and valuable to include. If a kid were someone that easily lost interest in a course or was not very interested in a certain class, they may then be more provoked to learn and pay attention if this new technology was included at their school and interested them. By doing so, there is potential that the student would then be able to improve their grade and get much out of this porgram. Also, if a student were to be even intrigued in this technology, there could be potential for this studen to go into a job field that dealt with this type of technology as there are many that vary greatly in doing so. Overall, the inclusion of present innovations and technology should be including the next generations, as success for them now will lead to future success for all. | 56
|
85ec1a2 | The SCP
Would you like to be part of the Seagoing Cowboys program? If you don't, I am going to tell you about a text I read about a man. In this text, it says that a man named Luke Bomberger was working two part-time jobs in a grocery store and a bank when his friend Don Reist invited him to go to Europe on a cattle boat. Luke couldn't say no. He knew it was an oppurtunity of a lifetime.
It was 1945, World War II was over in Europe, and many countries were left in ruins. To help these countries recover their food supplies, animals, and more, 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA, a relief and rehabilitation administration. UNRRA hired ''Seagoing Cowboys'' to take care of the horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas. Luke and his friend Don signed up for the Seagoing Cowboys program. In the text it also says that Luke went on cattle-boat trips. He also got to go to many places across the country. He also found time to have fun on board, ecspecially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded.
The cowboys played baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed. But being a Seagoing Cowboy was much more than an adventure for Luke Bomberger. It opened up the world to him. "I'm grateful for the opportunity," he says. "It made me more aware of people of other countries and their needs." That oppotunity of a lifetime is good to have because you could experience adventures you have never experienced before, and that is why you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program. | 12
|
7655f0b | In the atricle, "Driverless Cars Are Coming" it addresses the idea of driverless cars. I believe that humans should stay in control of the road, it has worked this far, why can't it continue working? For one, it is not equipped with the common since of a human, it cannot fuction with tough traffic mishaps. Secondly, the computers may malfuction, and they could cause a lot of damage.
There are a lot of issues with this car, firstly it has trouble dealing with complicated traffic issues, as seen in paragraph two. What if someone was driving on the interstate and fell asleep because the car was driving and the driver wasn't alerted going through roadwork? If someone died the driver would be responsible for the death. Or what if there was an accident? The car would keep going and bust through it, and it would be the drivers fault.
Another reason why it shouldn't be open to the public is because no computer is one hundred percent perfect. Computers always malfunction, they need to reboot sometimes, and othertimes they just quit working. I have been working on projects for English 10 before and my computer just shut off and I lost my whole project. It could happen with this, the car could reboot, or the computers could shut off and the driver could be asleep, and it shuts off. Causing a huge accident. How is this a good idea?
All in all, I would say that this isn't such a great idea. In the examples of not being able to deal with complicated traffic issues, and the computers malfuctioning, it just isn't a great idea. I believe humans should stay in control of the roads, it has worked this far, why can't it continue working? | 23
|
a34f3dc | The author does a great job explaining how the study of the intense planet Venus is worth it in the long run. Using many examples and providing the readers with pleanty of facts that support his claim that ''the study of Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents." The author states in paragraph 4 "if our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface?" Dispite all the negitive aspects of this planet the scientists still want to undergo with the study of its surface and conditions. Stating that Venus might have been the most Earth-like planet years and years ago forming similar mountains and valleys. Possibly covored by oceans just the same as our home planet Earth.
Venus may never be habitable by humans because of the harsh conditions the surface goes through with a sitting temperature of 800 degrees Fahrenheit and a atmospheric pressure 90 times greater than the Earths. One of the reasons stated by scientists in paragraph 4 that make the study of venus so important is that "Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration giventhe long time frames of space travel. This exploration of the planet is going to be different because old technology is going to be used to get information. The reasons for this is because the techology today is to delacate for the conditions on the planets surface.
Therefor the author provides the reader with facts about the risks of studying the planet venus. Dispite all the negitive aspects the author supports his claim with signifigent evedence and reasoning for the study of venus to be dubed worthy of further study. The harsh conditions are just one obstical that todays scientists are going to have to work to through to get the information they need about the misterious planet Venus. | 23
|
39dad84 | In this article the author is showing how the monilisa shows alot of emion and alot of expression. The first paragraph stated that she is 83 percent happy 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and two percent angry.
For the most part she is happy you can tell she is happy becaus ehshe is smilling in the picture. What you can not see is the other emtions such as disgust or fear or angry. So how can the author really say that she is all those things if she. although it could be a fake smile you never know. That is like everyday life a person could look happy but really be sad or mad about something you never really know how a person is feeling unless they personally tell you. Facial expression are a big part of our world. As the author states, "Even though indivulas often show varying degress of expression for example not smiling broadly."
What I stated in my paragraph befor was that you may tell somebody that your really close with you feelings but then be smiling or not showing any emtion at all. The author states it later in the article. He states " you can probalby tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." Us as humans have a hard time showing emotion or descrinbing our emtions . Although this painting is meant to bring a smile to your face it shows how much technolgy plays a big part in this as well. You can change they way somebody looks in pictures very easily. In our world today the technolgy is so wonderful it can changes images with the click of a button. | 01
|
6c18dde | Venus
Venus is the closest planet to earth and in terms of density and size. Venus is a very interesting place that scientists are always trying to find a way to discover new things about Venus, but that the planet is so inhospitable. Astronomers are so amazed by Venus because Venus may be the most earth-like planet in our solar system. Venus can have some features that the earth has and that it's our nearest option for a planetary visit. Venus can be a challenge to us because we human have curiosity what that planet can offer to us.
Venus has some smiliar and difference to earth because they both have different speed on the way they orbit the sun. Venus can be a challenge to us because it can be hard for us to get there. In that the degree temperature on Venus surface is over 800 degrees faherenheit and that atomsperic pressure is 90 times greater than we experience on our planet. Even though that Mercury is closer to our sun Venus has the hottest surface temperature. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration wants to send humans to study Venus so they can answers to there questions that they have.
To study Venus, it has risks because researchers cannot take samples of rocks, gas, or anything else, from a distance. Therefore scientists are trying to find ways to get a close up look or to get things from there to take back to earth, but in order to do that there are risks. Researchers are trying to build machines that can last long, at least to get some information about Venus. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration are simplifing some electronics and trying to look back to an old technology called mechanical computers. Venus has gained value to humans because we are so curious when we find out something new and we just need answers in order for us to stop being curious.
The whole main thing is that humans always face new challenges and with those challenges we try to overcome it. Venus made humans curious because there are some smiliarties and differences about earth. But in order to try to find answers there can be risks. Humans always tries to find ways to get answer, facing new obstacles, building new stuff, or just predicting things. Venus is a new challenge for us, but with the right techniques we well find answers. | 23
|
ae6d438 | I know some people don't like to go to school and they just want to stay home and play video games or sleep. Rather than going to school, but your parents still force you to go to school. And teachers look confused and saying whats wrong with our students. And don't know what to do. And most teacher are tired of students sleeping and thinking its a waste of their time and most quit.
Professor Thomas Huang from the Beckham Institute for Advance Science at the University of Illinois and many more. Are working with this computer that can identify your emotion without showing them and they tested with famous painting the Mona Lisa and the results were incredible. And what if the teachers can use this computer software on us so they can get some feedback and fix the problem why do students don't want to come to school and I know this machine could be very useful to others schools and be useful to the cops or any force. By helping them what they are and justing getting to know a little something about the bad guy. So this could be a huge impact to everyone. | 12
|
ae7dc92 | My position on driverless cars is that I would enjoy to see them traversing the roads. They can alert people of hazards on their path at anytime due to the sensors they have, smart cars can do most of the work while the driver just has to stay alert just incase of complicated traffice issues, and it's possible to text in the car while it's driving itself.
The smart cars can alert the drivers of anything hazardous coming up in the roads with its sensors. Therefore if a driver is doing something else the car will immediately alert the driver to take action to avoid any problems or damage. The text states "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents." This textual evidence supports the point that these cars can alert drivers of hazardous or required human skills. Then they can also do all the work only need help when in need.
The smart car can do all the average driving, but will request assistance when handed complicated traffic problems. Smart cars can do drive by themself most of the time and they can alert the driver to get aid. The text states "In reality, Google has had cars that could drive independently under specific conditions since 2009. Their cars had driven more than half a million miles without a crash, but so far, Google cars aren't truly driverless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues." The textual evidence given supports the point that these cars can do the work as long as it's not too complicated and in need of human skills. Then they finally can help people who text and drive due to its safety functions.
The fact that smart cars can drive by themselves and actually alert the driver to take actions can mean that people who text will be able to live better. The functions of the smart car has heads-up displays and an alert function that vibrates the driver's seat to alert the driver to take action of problems. 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. In this way, the in-car system is actually a safety feature, and safety is a big concern." Those are my supporting details about my position and thoughts on driverless cars.
My position on driverless cars is that I approve of them and think they should be thought of and finished. They can alert drivers of any hazards, so they can take action, they require no help unless confronted by complicated traffice issues, and people have the ability to text in the car unless of an emergency that has been alerted to the driver to take action of what's happening. | 45
|
f0cb8d2 | Dear,Florida I think that we should keep the Electoral College becuase it keeps the number of votes and it produces a clear winner. The Electoral College restores some of the weight in the political balance that large states (by population) lose by virtue of the senate decreed in the constitution. The Electoral College is a process that consists of 538 electors. Each state equals the number of members in the house of representives. The Electoral also select what their responsibilities are. The Electoral college is widely regarded as an anachronism a non-democratic method. The Electoral College is also a mordern sense. Also no region (south,northeast,etc.) has enough electoral votes to elect a president. Residents also feel that their votes dont get counted that the new president will have no regard for thier interest, that he really isnt their president.
Electoral College alson avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate receives a majority of the vote cast. | 12
|
d36602f | I just graduaded for high school. I got an opportunity of a lifetime. My friend Don Reist to go to Europe on a cattle boat. I couldn'd say no to him. It was 1945 and world war to in Europe was just over and I wanted to help put it back together.
Many of the countries were left in ruins because of the war. I went to help because I wanted to help with them. Together we made UNRRA and hired seagoing cowboys take care of young and old caddle an the farms to get started with work.
In August 1945 we were sent to New Orleans. We were sent the day the Pacific war ended. I tured 18 before we went to Greece whitch ment I could be drafted to the army. Every one told me just do keep doing my job intil the time comes if it comes.
The cattle trips were hard and long. I saw China and it was cool. The Acropolis in greece was a sight. Most all the streets in Italy were full of water. but I had a good time were ever you put me.
In the end we all tryed to help out other people even if they arnt native to use. | 01
|
77cc9c1 | The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it has due to many reason many reason. One of the reason why is because the Venus is referred as Earth twin since it the closest planet to Earth in the Solar sytem. Another reason is that Venus might have been the most Earth-like planet. Therefore Venus is a great planet for the human which will one day could live if study well and successfully.
Venus was often referred as the Earth twin due it similar with the Earth and it likeness with the Earth.Through the author suggest to study Venus since it's very dangerous like it say in passage 3 "On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degress Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greather than anything humans encounter on Earth" saying that it very hot due the increase of 800 degrees and 90 time greater of pressure on earth which make it harder for astronomers to land it and study it. Due that since you can't really study Venus from the distance. Furthermore the author beileve it important to the Venus and study it. If studying Venus success it would be very worthy even after all the hardship that would have awhile trying to study it. Since Venus have been earth-like planet meaning if we study and learn about it there might a chance of living there and most of the problem on earth would be solve which can lead to human succes as.
In conlusion the author believe studying Venus is worthy even thought there are many hardship and that it would lead to better life and change in human kind due the Venus, planet which was once have life and features that are analogous to on Earth. | 12
|
62aae76 | STREET_ADDRESS
CITY_STATE_ZIP_CODE
STREET_ADDRESS
CITY_STATE_ZIP_CODE
Dear Senator,
Today I have been thinking about how we elect our prisedent. I have done some reseach and found out that we use the Electoral College. Some people thing the Electoral College is good. Other not so much, like Bob Dole and much more. Well I also think the Electoral College should be abolished. The Electoral College give people the allusion that they have no chance and give bigger populated states more power.
To start off, "people in the United State of America vote for president". When in realaty they attualy vote for slate of electors and then that goes to the president. " Under the elictoral college system, voters vote not for the president , but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president." says in Source 2 (What is wrong with the electoral college). Giving the feeling to people that the president they want will not win. Let me give you an example from source 2 "thanks to the quirks of the electoral college -won the popular vote, but lost the presidency , over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direcet election". This mean the voters voted for him ,but he still lost. What if eveyone in you state vote for that guy and still lost, doesnt that give you the allusion that your vote has no chance?
Talking about states , did you know the electoral collegs also works on state population? Each state has a population, giving them their electoral votes. President will target the bigger populated states to win their votes. Giving the more populated state more power to do what they want." a larger state gets more attention from the presidential candidates in a campaign than a small state does..." in source 3. Since the president wants to win and needs the electoral vote he will go to the states and do thing for them. Like donate money for schools or help with businesses so they can have their votes. Some state that get more attention/power have are Texas(38), Florida(29), and Califonia(55). Saying in Source 3. "Obama , who won that vote, got 29 electoral votes" from Florida said in souce 3. You know why? Because a week before he came to schools in Florida and helped them. I know because he came to my school.
The Electoral College should be abolished. It make people think they have no chance of winning and give more populated state more power. I think Dole was right we should of abolished the Elctoral College along time ago. Can you do something about it Senator? | 23
|
5d30afd | In this article "Driverless Cars Are Coming", the author talks about the aspects of driverless cars. To me driverless cars can be a bad thing. Just think about a car running on its own without a driver. That's basically impossible and also scary. I feel like cars should always have a driver inside them.
Driverless cars can sometimes be a danger to people. If the car was completly driverless then it wouldn't need human skills. A driverless car shouldn't be able to use human skill. It should be able to do everything when needed to. The driver must remain alert when in a driverless car. They must keep their hands near the steering wheeling at all times to be ready to take control.
Drivers would get bored just sitting around waiting for the car to alert them. Why would anyone want to buy a driverless car isn't in full control? People shouldn't make driverless cars becasue it could probably hurt someone. What happens if the technology fails? Whose fault would it be if it does fail? In case of an accident, there should be laws. Where would they sell these cars.
If the technology ever fails I feel like it would be the drivers fault. It would be their fault simply because they were so eager to try out the driverless car. They thought it would be so perfect to try it out. But then it would the inventor's fault because they were the ones that invented it. They should've made sure everythng was fine and working properly before they someone buy it. There shoudn't be any problems with the driverless car if you're gonna buld it. Make sure everything works perfectly then have people buy it.
There it is. The reasons why there shoud not be driverless cars. People could get in accidents id they're not focus on the alerts. They could be bored while waiting for something to pop up. The technology could probably fail while they're in the car on the road. New laws would be needed for these cars. | 23
|
34ee3cc | I believe that the face was land made because in the picture from 1976 in the fifth pharagraph, it looks like a face. But when you look at the other pictures at the top of the article you don't see any dips that point towards alien creation. I belive that like, in the article, it was just an effect of the light and shadows. The shadows could have been made by a higher point of the mesa and when the light hit it just right, it made it look like a face. In the last pharagraph, Jim Garvin, the cheif scientist of NASA's Mars Exploration Program said, " It reminds me of Snake River Plain in Idaho. That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars."
To me Garvin's idea of what the Face on Mars really is, seem very logical. There have been land formations that people say are made by aliens. But, for all we know it could have been man made millions of years ago. We will never know because we don't have strong enough evidence to prove if it was man made, a creation made by aliens, or was simply made over time. Looking at the third image at the top of the article, you can see that there is nothing on the surface of the Face on Mars. "As a rule of thumb, you can discern thins in a digital image 3 times bigger then the pixle size. So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shake, you could see what they were." Garvin said in pharaghraph eleven.
From far away the Face looks like, well, a face. But, once you get a close up of it you can see that it was only a forplay of shadows. The things that we hear about on the news, in magazines, radio talk shows, films, and books get so blown out of praportion that people will read it and believe that there really is a face on mars that was created by aliens. I understand that there are some things that we really don't know about, and maybe never will. But, I believe that if there are aliens, that we would be given some strong evidence that they were on mars, earth or wherever.
But, for now, we will have to keep looking into things and discover more things about earth and the things that happened on earth and to earth millons of years ago. When technoligy advances and we get more chances to look at things and get deeper into research, we will know if there really are aliens or not. | 34
|
1ef816d | The author does not effectively support his suggestion that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. He believes that Venus has more value than just a rocky surface that is completely inhabitable by humans right now. Although the author provides multiple details that relate to his suggestion, he provides even more details that contradict his idea.
One way the author contradicts his suggestion is by telling us about the unmanned spacecraft that have been sent to Venus. He tells us how there have been multiple spacecraft sent to Venus but none have survived for a long period of time. For example, in the text the author states, " No spacecraft has survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades." This excerpt from the author's article completely contradicts his idea. He says that Venus is a worthy pursuit, but how is he supposed to convince readers this when at the same time he is saying that no spacecraft has been sent to Venus for more than thirty years.
The author also contradicts his idea of the value of exploring Venus by describing the planet. In paragraph three the author says that Venus has ninety-seven percent caron dioxide and has clouds that contain highly corrosive sulfuric acid. He also states that Venus has the hottest surface temperature in our solar system and would liquefy many metals. These details do not help his idea at all. They just show how much more inhabitable and worthless Venus would be to explore. It would be a waste of time and money to study a planet that humans wouldn't be able to even live on.
One final way the author does not effectively support his claim is by giving us details about the challenges humans would face even if we were able to make it to Venus. He says that photography and videography would be ineffective and that researchers wouldn't be able to take samples of rock, gas, or anything else while hovering safely above the planet. So even if humans were able to make it to Venus safely, it would be extremely difficult to research Venus. It wouldn't be worth it to spend time and money on an expedition to Venus that wouldn't even allow us to gain knowledge.
The author does give a good point to why Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. He says that Venus was once like Earth long ago and that it was probably covered in oceans and supported various forms of life. He describes the value of returning to Venus as "indisputable." However, he does not give enough evidence to support this claim. He only gives one piece of evidence on why Venus is a worthy pursuit and that is that Venus is closely related to Earth. But throughout the whole article, it seems he is constantly contradicting his statement. The author could have more effectively supported his claim that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents by providing details that will outweigh his examples of the dangers and challenges that Venus presents. | 45
|
7739354 | You hear it all, throughout breaking news; to protesters trying to make a difference in our world. Pollution is dangerous and people don't fully understand the costly effects to our everyday living. Transportation is a way of means by transitioning from one place to another. The most popular way of transportation is the vehicle. A fast and easy way to get to your destination with just a turn of the key, or in this case now-a-days, the click of a button.
Acres of land being towed to create bigger roads, or streets because of the vast majority of people using cars to get around. With each car means more gas or diesel, more gas equals more money, and more pollution. Our atmosphere can only take so much from the faulty mistakes we choose to do everyday. Places like Paris and suburbs in Germany are becoming more aware of how much cars can effect our Earth. After days of near record pollution Paris decided to enforce a 'partial driving ban' to clear some of the air in the global city. The way they enforced this was motorists with even numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home. The same would apply for the odd numbered license plates the following day. After this, smog and congestion decreased by 60 percent in the capital of France. Other places like Bogota, Columbia is having 'car free day' where millions of people would enjoy their day outside hiking, biking, and taking buses for work during the day. These decisions and actions cleared the streets in Bogota and avoided jams, leaving the people to have a nice day enjoying the outdoors. Carlos Arturo says "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution."
This doesn't mean give up cars all in all. Rather, limit the use of driving your car. America's love affair with vehicles seem to be dulling down. After 2005, the number of miles driven started to decrease. Part of the explanation to this lies in the recession, because tight budget Americans could'nt afford new cars, and the unemployed were'nt going to work. Sociologists believe if these patterns of decreasing numbers of car owners and people driving-- that it will have beneficial outcomes for carbon emissions and the enviroment. On the opposing side this has a negative effect for the car industries.
The positive effects will benifit future generations to come, with clean air to breathe and a fresh start. By limiting car usage there would be less traffic jams, more people getting in touch with their surroundings and even losing 3 to 5 pounds while they're at it. Transportation is a way of means by transitioning from one place to another, it doesn't always have to be a vehicle with so many other options you can choose from. Make a difference in the world, one less car at a time. | 34
|
06cf397 | There are plenty of advantages of limiting car usage, like it will help lower green house gases, it will help save money, and its a great way to get exercise.
Don't get me wrong I love driving and all but it's effecting our ecosystem. Just think if one day out of every week we rode our bikes, or we car pooled, or we took the bus think of how much smog would go away. In source 2 it talks about how they enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. On Monday motorist with even-numbered licence plates were ordered to leave there cars at home same went for odd-numbered licence plates the following day. With in five days sixty pecent of the smog was cleared. And they only did it for five days, imagine if every city in the world did this once a month. In source one it states that passenger cars are responsible fro twelve percent of green house gas emisssions in Europe, and up to fifty percent in some parts of the United States. In source one it also talks about a city in Germany named Vauban. Vauban is a city that has banned cars. There is a main thoroughfare , where the tram runs to downtown Freiburg, and and a ffew streets on the edge of the community but ther e are only two places to park-large garadges on the outside of town. And it cost 40,000 dollars along witha home. If we had cities like this here in the U.S. it would be so much better and there wouldnt be so much pollution.
By limiting the usage on cars it will help save money. Think if you walked or rode you're bike to work everyday then you wouldnt have to pay for gas. Gas is tipically three to four dollars so if you wanted to put thirty gallons of gas in you car it could cost you ninety dollars. Thats a lot of money to spend on gas and thats not even a full tank for some people. Sure if you ride you bike to work everyday you might have to fix it but you're gonna have to fix your car at some point to and bike parts are so much cheaper than car parts so you'd be saving money there too. And if you walked you would'mt have to even worry about fixing your bike. It might take you longer to get to where you need to go but think you'll be saving money and the Earth. You don't even have to ride your bike or walk, you can car pool or take the bus. You still have to pay for the bus but its way cheaper than paying for gas.
If you're limiting your car usage and walking or riding your bike to work everyday, which maens you'll be getting exercise. Most people don't get the exercise they need so by limiting your car usage not only are you helping the environment you're getting the daily exercise you need. Even if you're riding the bus you're gonna have to get to the bus stop some how. And they even have a place to put your bike on the bus so if the bus does'tn take you all the way to where you need to go you can ride your bike the rest of the way.
So limiting your car usage is'nt all that bad. I mean I don't know anyone who does'nt want to help eliminate green house gases, save money and get exercise while doing it. | 34
|
27ec6d0 | Adventures at the Sea
You should be in the Seagoing Cowboys program because. You get to learn about so many animals. You get to know how much they eat, and what they eat. As stated in paragraph six it says. They had to be fed and watered two or three times a day. Bales of hay and bags of oats had to be pulled up from the lower holds of the ship. Stalls had to be cleaned.
Another reason you should try this program is because it is very big opporuntinity. You get to see the world. You get to know what it is like at sea. Maybe you might like it. And decide that you want to do it for a living on your own ship. It says in paragraph nine. "Im grateful for the opportunity," he says. "It made me more aware of people of other countries and thier needs."
My last reason is that you may be able to learn what other countries are like. Would'nt you like to go explore the world? See what it is like in other places. My stated can be supported by paragraph five. It states in the paragraph. "Besides helping people, I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and China. But seeing the Acropolis in Greece was special," he says. "So was taking the gondola ride in Venice, Italy, a city with streets of water." Those are the reasons why you should goin the Seagoing Cowboys program today ! | 23
|
bf041d5 | Dear state senator,
I am writing you today because I find we should not be using the electoral college. It doesn't make much sense to make things so much more complicated than they have to be. Why would we vote for a group of people to vote for us? it doesnt make sense, why not just vote on our own, that way we know we voted for whom we really wanted
? voting for an electoral group is like going to vote and saying "Hey, im going to vote today for a group that will hopefully vote for the presisdent i want." I personally would not put my faith in someone who could just so easily change their mind and not vote for my choice.
I do see the reasoning in having an electoral college so that way we are less likely to end up with a tie or any other mishaps. however why would we not instead just have an extra group of say, 50 people to vote if we end up with a tie? I find that would be much easier. people would be able to just vote for whom they wanted and be done with the whole situation.
Remeber the disaster factor? we are lucky that 2000 situation was the biggest election crisis in the century; the system allows far worse. our legislatures are responsible technically for picking electors, and the chosen electors can always go against the will of the people.
what if a tie does occur in the electoral vote? it nearly happened in 1968, a shift of just 41,971 votes would have deadlocked the election; in 1976, a tie would have occured if a mere 5,559 voters in Ohio and 3,687 voter in hawaii had voted the other way. the election is only a few swing voters away from a disaster.
The electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each state, canidates dont spend time in states they know they have no chance of winmning, focusing on the tight races in the "swing" states. During the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see the canidates at all. If anyone has a good argument for putting the fate of the presidency in the hands of a few swing voters in Ohio, they have yet to make it.
The electoral college is just not a fair nor good way to handle the voting system and i believe we need to change it. | 23
|
d59e18f | Driverless cars would be a huge problem honestly. if they crash who will pay for the damages done? they also wouldnt be cheap to build.
First off they would be dangerous, because we already have drivers that go above the speed limit. now if we had driverless cars and this person could some how go really fast and he isnt paying attention to the road there will be a car crash. another thing some people still text while driving so their eyes wont be on the road it will be on their phone and then an accident could happen.
Building these driverless cars will obviously take alot of money to build cause of all the extra parts that will be need to keep them on the road. they would also be sold at a really high price as well because who wouldnt want a car that could drive on its own.
Humans would be more efficent at driving then the car driving alone. maybe the censor that keeps the car on the road goes out or anything could happen to the technoolgy in the car that is keeping the car going could mess up and result in a accident.
Who would be paying for the accidents? if
the car doesnt require a driver and its going along its way and it hits another car who's fault would it be? Who would have to pay for the damages done? the goverment wouldnt pay for it because they would eventually go broke from all the accidents they have to pay for. | 12
|
e065df0 | yes this may seem like the aliens did it so it can think its no real , but you have to look at the facts around it. This was taken 25 years ago. This is just a natural landform because its a pixel image , it also reveals as a rock form can be many different objects ,and they can prove it with science equitment.
The face of mars is a pixel image .It is a exact degree angle span. " malins team catpured an extraordinary photo using the cameras absolute maximum resolution .Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 mters . compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo. "As a rule of thumb , you can discern things in a digital image 3 times biggger than the pixelsize, he added". This tells how the image s an exact formation at which you can tell. Aliens wouldnt be able to do that , it can also be a different object other then a face.
this also can be many different things other then a face. It states ".. but the sensation was short lived. Scientists figured it was just another Martian mesa, common enough around Cydonia, only this one had unusua shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. A few days later NASA unveiled the the image for all to see. The caption noted a "huge rock formation."..."so if there were objects in this picutre like airlanes on the ground or Egyptains-style pyraids or even small shacks , you could see what they were !". This shows the imaghe can reveal anything. Aliens coukd not make anything if they knew what they were gong to make .But scince can also prive that .
Scince equitament how the image can really come off as. For example "...which resembles a human head .. formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes , nose and mouth. The authors reasoned it would be a good way to engage the public and attract attention to Mars....Thousands of anxious web site sufers were waiting when the image first appeared on the JPL wed site , revealig ... a natural landform. There was no aien monoutment after all." This proves that there was not alien monoutment face, just a face.
This may seem like aliens do live onmars , but think stuff does land on mars , it could just be a similar reflection. Thankful that scincetheorys can be proven wrong or right. | 23
|
835a789 | "Making Mona Lisa Smile" is about how a computer can detect emotions from a picture or person. In this passage, the author explains how this new software is able to detect emotions. "New software has been developed that improves accuracy in perceiving emotions of others." This new software is called Facial Action Coding System. The passage states, "This new software, the Facial Action Coding System, has promising applications for a variety of industries." The software detected in the Mona Lisa painting that she is "83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry."
There are specific steps on how this software works. "The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D computer model of the face." The software detects emotions like happiness, sadness, anger, fear, disgust, and surprise. "The facial expressions for each emotion are universal." Most people can tell how their friend is feeling based on their facial expression. The passage says," By weighting the different units, the software can even identify mixed emotions."
The new technology is surprising. The text states, "According to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them." New technology is able to detect human emotions, even when the person is hiding them. " To an expert, faces do not lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a "smiling" politician or celebrity is not being truthful." The computer software can detect human emotions from paintings, picture, and in person. | 01
|
5caa2b6 | Driverless cars aren't really anything we are relying on for the future.Driverless cars are awed by many due to how they are portrayed.When actually, they have no reason to be focused on and worked on so much.They will ingrave more of a negative effect than a positive in society.Driverless cars are unessesary for the world we live in,considering there aren't
many problems about cars not being as reliant.
Driverless cars are depicted as a more flexible way of transportation and a gate for new generations of automobiles to arrive.You don't hear much about cars not being as reliant as they should be.Cars have the functions we use every single day and require average to little work to transmit.Roadblocks however are a big obstacle to both driverless cars and normal cars, since driverless cars fall victim to traffic jams or accidents.The idea for a driverless car is to be able to keep your eye on the road while the car keeps you safe,however this idea cannot be relied on heavily because any sort of accident or event that accurs on road will immediately put the individual in the car into the position of the driver transferring all of those responsibilities the car had at one point back to the driver rendering the cars idea of being driverless to useless.
There's also the fact that the fault of an accident would be a bit difficult to locate.Was it the cars fault for not being effective in its abilities?Or would it be the drivers fault for not being alert to any sort of situation?More laws will be nessesary to make sure we have restrictions for those using a driverless car.The ratio of positive effects these types of cars may have to the negative is very small.This generation has little to no problems with driving cars being too tedious or too troublesome.We don't need more amounts of problems entering this world but should focus on what is now. | 23
|
402c653 | Limiting car usage can be an advantage for every city. While there have been efforts in the past who decades to make cities denser and better for walking, planners are now taking the concept to the suburbs. Many experts expect public transport serving suburbs to play a much larger role in a new six year federal transportation bill to be approved this year. All of our development since World War ll has been centered on the car and that will have to change. As a result, 70 percent of Vauban's families do not own cars and 57 percent sold a car to move here.
Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of global city, Diesel fuel was blamed, since France has a tax policy that favors diesel over gasoline. Dieseles make up 67 percent of vehicles in France, compared to a 53.3 percent average of diesel engines in the rest of Western Europe, according to Reuters. Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city, uneven, pitten sidewalks, rush hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic, and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up.
President Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions, unveiled last week, will get a fortuitous assist from incipient shift in America behavior. Recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by. The sociology professor at Drexel University and director of its Mobilities Research and Policy Center said that differents things are converging which suggest that we are witnessing a long term cultural shift. Demographic shifts in the driving population suggest that the trend may accelerate. There has been a large drop in the porcentage of 16 to 39 year olds getting a license, while older people are likely to retain their licenses as they age.
In conclution it has beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment since transportation is the second largeest source of America's emissions, just behind power plants. It also has negative implications for the car industry but America's love affair with its vehicles seems to be cooling, the number of miles driven in the United States peaked in 2005 and dropped steadily thereafter, according to an analysis. | 12
|
df99bf2 | There are many people that believe that the ailens bulid the structures that are on Mars, but many don't have reasons on why they think that. There are many reason why aliens bulit the structure but not very good reasons. While there is scientificly proven facts and statements that the aliens did not build the structures and that it is all natural landform.
Many people believe that the aliens bulit the structure but they are wrong, there's no alien building something so we can capture its making. Just like on the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars" sentence 7 it says, "Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking Photos. Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL web site, revealing . . . a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all." The first time the Viking took the pictures the camera didn't have the good resoultion that the camera had now, so it looked like a face or alien monument but really it was just some natural landscape.
Although there are credible information, there is just people who don't believe the information. They think it really was aliens building the monuments/structures. Like it says on sentence 5 "Some people think the Face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars-- evidence that NASA would rather hide, say conspiracy theorists." Meaning that the conspiracy theorists believe that it is NASA trying to hide the real evidence on the aliens. They think NASA is trying to trick them and they are not falling for it. But whar they don't have is credible resourses like NASA does.
Now that technology has become a lot better NASA could now use a better camera for better pictures for the natural landscape on Mars. Like it says on sentence 11 "As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size." says Gavin, this is saying that now that they have a camera that is 3 times better they could now see things much more clearly and better and all the natural landscape there is.
In counclusion, the structures that were seen on Mars are really just natural lanscape just like when it says on sentence 12, "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a buttle or mesa-- landforms common around the American West. It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho." says Gavin, this is comparing the Middle Butte to the natural landscape on Mars because it's saying that landscapes do have things in common like how they are naturally made by, the planet it's on. | 34
|
7fd1119 | Over the past years technology has had many different purposes in the world, and now with the help of the softtware "Facial Action Coding System" teachers in classrooms will now be able to adress their student's emotions when they act out of the normal. In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" by Nick D'Alto it shows many examples regarding this topic. Because of the student's lack of expressing their emotions verbally, this computer software must be used to reveal what is happening within their heads.
In order to know what a student's mind wants to be happy and not bored, the teachers must use this software because a person cannot always comprehend facial features. In the aricle it talks about how many emotions showed by making facial expressions are not always comprehendable. According to the author, in paragraph 4 it states "'The facial expressions for each emotion are universal'" (D'Alto 4). The term "universal" as it is being used in the sentence shows just the magnitude of how much a face can express. If teachers don't use this software, school might just remain boring to students without the teachers knowing.
Even though some people would agree that it is an invasion to privacy to use this in classrooms, the software would be for the good of the lack of communication between the teacher and students. The software would also improve the overall performance of the students during class, since now the teacher would know what to do when the class is bored or happy. In the article it also enhances the facts of nonverbal communication by stating "'Most human communiction is nonverbal, including emotional communication,' notes Dr. Huang" (D'Alto 6). If emotions and communications are nonverbal, why not use technology to unravel the thoughts of a student. No teacher would want their students to feel negative feelings towards their classes, so here is an opportunity to make school better for both students and teachers.
Students may have to be provoked so they can show what they are feeling, however; the teachers making their students show emotion will help them be happier while being in the classroom. Students who do not want to be in school must be adressed first so they are better of in the future. This statement is supported by looking in the article where the author states "According to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, butr also may even help produce them" (D'Alto 9). Teacher making their students "break a smile" would aid their bordem into becoming a happier and more positive emotion.
Thus, the use of technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is positive, because of the help it would provide on the student's perspective of school. Less students would drop out and more students would go to school and learn just because of the enviroment that the computer software helps evoke. This valuable software must not be ignored! | 45
|
f2bc006 | Driveless cars i see coming up in the future , because they say Audi , Benz and Nissan will have made a driverless car by 2020 . Which is awsome cause now days teens are dying because they wanna text and drive at the same time , but at the same time i seen a new thing were you cqan put your phone at eye level so you can pay attention to the road and your phone. The negative part i see is General Motors has been trying to make a car that can run a speical track since 1950s the track was embedded with
an electrical cable that sent radio signals to a receiver on the front end of the , engineers at bekeley tired something similar but they used magnets with alternating polarity but that still hasnt worked ig. creating this arguments has me thinking twice bout a driverless car cause what bout some people perfer drivinig they wounldnt buy this car they would buy a car you drive onn your own nd how would you teach someone how to drive when the car drives by its self it dosnt make alot of since by as far as they makeing buses nd taxi that self drive thats a wonderful idea casue you wounldnt have to talk to no one just a quite ride to were every you going.
to drive a smart car they would have to be smart roads all around the city but would a regular car work on a smart road idk ?????? But smart cars has manufactuers so how much smarter would they have to be like they would need alot of sensors o the breaks , tires ,sterring wheel, all wheels all around the car thats my arugment bout driverless cars i just wanna persude to that driverless cars should not be sumitted to be in the future of 2020 ........ | 12
|
2917d93 | Are cars necessary in today's society? Of course they are necessary. Now, are driverless cars necessary? I would argue that they are not. Cars have been around for about a hundred years, and not once has society put its foot down and demanded a car that drives itself. The driverless cars this article discusses are not actually driverless, they are not legal, and there is no telling what future problems may arise.
Shouldn't a truly driverless car not require a human at all? I personally believe a driverless car should be able to navigate itself without human interferance. If it requires a human, then what is the point of calling it driverless? In fact, all the driverless cars being created right now are designed to notify the driver when it approaches a work zone or accident. So, in case the need to have a human take over arises, an individual would have to be sitting in the drivers seat, paying absolute attention to the road, and await the moment the car will allow the individual to take over. Wouldn't that take away the nejoyment of owning a driverless car? I believe it is even more of a hassle than driving ever would be. A person would have to fight boredom and remain alert while doing nothing other than sitting in the driver seat. To all driverless car companies: driving is paying attention to the road, but the driver is actually engaged, making driving more interesting.
Not only are driverless cars not fully developed, but they are not even legal. Most states do not allow driverless cars. In fact, most states do not even allow driverlesss cars to be tested on their roads. The article only mentions four places that allow driverless cars, and they only allow limited use. If these cars are not even allowed by most states to out on the road for testing, imagine how long it would take to pass laws to get these cars approved.
A myriad of problems could arise pertaining to driverless cars. The article mentioned a very real problem in driverless cars: if something goes awry and someone in injured, who is at fault? These cases would resort in major courtroom battles between average people and multi-million dollar companies. Another potential problem with driverless cars is the change off between driver and robot. If the car signals the driver and the driver does not respond, then what would the car do? A multitude of problems could appear, and all automakers can do is hope they will be abloe to find solutions to these probelms. To quote the article, "Automakers are continuing their work on the assumption that the problems ahead will be solved." Not only are the companies unsure of what issues will surface, but they are not completely sure they will be able to find solutions.
Driving has been central to the American way of life for a large span of time, and if manually driving cars has been working, why change it? Driverless cars have been beiong tested since the 50's, so there clearly is no rush in getting these cars on the street. Also, once these cars are available to the public they will most likely only be accesable to the rich. In time the driverless cars would be more affordable, but the original prices would be high. Driverless cars are getting attention, but as soon as the public knows they will only be for wealthy hands for a bit of time, the excitment will die down.
The system works, and it works well, so why change it? Driverless cars may sound high-end and futurisitc, but our cars now do the job well. Plus, there are hazads and roadblocks the driverless cars will have to overcome first. Should we really make state legislatures waste time debating the use of a driverless car that is not completely driverless? Driverless cars have benefits, but they are not street legal. I see no point in spending money for a car that cannot be driven in most streets and is not able to operate without a human there to takeover incase something goes wrong. | 45
|
f8c72b6 | Did you know Venus and Mars are the closest planets to the Earth? Did you also know that it is the brightest star in the solar system during the night time? Did you also know planets are stars? Venus is a hard plant to visit for human because no human knows what it feels like to be on Venus. "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" is a story that tells us why humans keep studying the planet Venus. Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit because it is the most earth likely planet, they are coming up with new approaches , and astronomers and humans are fascinated with Venus .
First of all, studying Venus is a worthy pursuit because it is the most earth likely planet. In the article it states, "Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those of Earth." In the text it says, that humans have sent many spacecraft to Venus. So, since they have sent many spacecrafts to Venus they would know some of the things that on the planet.
In addition, to it being the most earth likely planet studying Venus is a worthy pursuit because they are coming up with different apporaches to make it have less dangers. In the article it states, " NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float about the fray." NASA is not giving up on different ways to make it the Venus, they are also trying to make it safe so people can actually go and see since the spacecraft are not lasting as long. The article also states, "some simplified eletronics of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions." But NASA has been testing new technology so their spacecrafts could at least last more time then the orinigal. New computer technology is more equipt than the orinigal.
Finally, studying Venus is a worthy pursuit because astronomers and humans are fascinated with Venus. In the article it states, "Venus would go get up close and personal despite the risks. Or maybe we should think of them as challenges."
The article also states, people are thinking as if the risk are not dangers but are thinking of them as challenges because they are so curious to know what on the planet. When people want to know something they are going to keep trying and trying until they reach their goal no matter what it takes.
In conculsion, Venus is one of the many planets that has not been fully explored but soon that goal is it be reached. Studying Venus is a worthy pursuit because it is the most earth likely plaent, they are coming up with new apporaches, and the people are fasinated with Venus. Although, it might take some time the people are going to achive what they have been striving for. | 34
|
e671912 | The planet Venus is inhospitable at its current state, but is it worth it to find out the truth? Scientists tell us that Venus is averaging temperatures over 800 degrees Fahrenheit and the pressure is 90 times greater than Earth's. Venus has been unexplorable due to these factors with the last mission failing in a few hours, but is it worth the risk? The idea of pursuing Venus is dangerous, but can be worth it to find more about how the geography was similar to earth, and if Venus could ever support life again.
Venus is called Earth's sister planet because it is the closest planet to Earth in density, size, and distance. Humans have tried to explore Venus many times in the past but have all failed due to the intense temperature and pressure of the planet. The planet also has a thick atmosphere of 97% carbon dioxide which makes it even more challenging to visit. Despite these factors, why do scientists want to visit this deadly planet? Scientists are very infatuated with this planet because it used to be just like earth from a geography standpoint. The planet was covered with large oceans, rocky sediment, valleys, mountains, and craters. These are more than enough reasons for scientists to explore Venus because they want to learn more about what occured for the planet to transform from the earth like place. Scientists need to learn more about Venus so they can learn more about our planet too. They are working on ways to observe the planet while being able to come back alive. NASA has developed an interesting idea to send humans to study venus. They want to study Venus by hovering above the planet just like planes fly over storms. This idea would keep humans away from the harmful things Venus has to offer, but there are some down sides to this idea. Observing Venus from above can only do so much for us. Light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere, so insight into the ground life of Venus is limited. The biggest down side is the fact that researchers cannot take samples of Venus such as rock and grass back to earth to study. This idea is still better than nothing because anything we learn from this mission is something we did not know before.
The age old question that most people have on planets is "could they ever inhabit life again?" Scientists have studied planets for many years and have seen a variety of things. They have concluded that Mars will be able to inhabit life and have started a program where sign ups are available to leave Earth to help scientists conduct an experiment for life. Venus once held many characteristics similar to earth, but the most important one is that many years ago Venus could have supported a variety of life. The question is what changed? Venus has very hot temperatures and high pressures so it is difficult for scientists to get up close and take samples to study. Scientists are working on different ways to study Venus where they can get closer to take samples. NASA has used some simple electronics made of silicon carbide and simulated it in the chaotic conditions of Venus and it survived for three weeks. This is important because they can use these electronics to send them into the atmosphere of Venus and take pictures and samples from the planet until they find an alternate solution to getting humans past that thick carbon dioxide atmosphere. Scientists also thought of reverting back to mechanical computers to go into the atmosphere. This could work because things that use mechanical parts tend to do better in conditions of high pressure, heat, and other limiting factors. These things could be worth it to the people of Earth because if we determine a way to put life on Venus, the whole world would change.
The idea of Venus' geography being very similar to Earth's and the fact that it could have supported life makes it worth it to study venus despite the dangers that come with it. Venus used to have oceans. mountains, and valleys just like earth, but have no idea what happened to all of those things which make them want to study the planet even more. Life could have been supported long ago and scientists are working to discover a way around the limiting factors to figure out if it could ever be supported again. Scientists are doing everything they possibly can to study Venus and it is only a matter of time before we have the answers we seek. | 34
|
ee8161c | Is there really a new kind of life on mars. No! We are the only life in this universe. Plus if people lived on mars, how could they build such a huge amount of rock into a face so perfectly.
What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa--landforms. Also back then they did not have that great of cameras but now they do. With the new cameras, we could acually see that it was just a landform with cracks in it. The only reason people think it is a sign, is because of the shadows. It makes up its eyes, nose, and mouth. What, do you think they could make that with their bare hands?
I don't think that there is people on mars, if there was , we would have probably found them all ready. I beleive that the [face] is not really a face. If you you beleive that there is, than thats fine but the real truth is that its not a face. | 12
|
00eabc5 | Just Straight FACS
Anybody can read a room. Whether it's at a party, an important meeting, a funeral, or a Pre-Calculus lesson at 8 a.m., it's easy to look around and see how the people around you are feeling due to body language and facial expression.
Others don't think so, though. Prof. Thomas Huang and his team of experts have come up with new tech that can recognize all 44 muscles in the human face, and create a diagnostic on how a person is feeling. This is interesting, yes, but some may think that this technology could be used in classrooms to get a general feel on what each student is feeling about a lesson.
I believe that using the FACS (Facial Action Coding System) in a classroom setting would have no merit and would just be a waste of time and money in public schools across America, because of how weak the technology in the FACS actually is.
In the text, Dr. Huang says that "facial expressions for each emotion are universal," and that "varying degrees of expression" can still be used to recognize the feelings and emotions of any human being. When applying this to a classroom enviroment, this can't be correct. That is due to many natural factors in humans.
For example, the world has progressed a lot, and more children with mental disabilities and special needs are being allowed to be involved in regular classes. For a student with a form of autism, it may be hard for them to convey certain emotions on a regular basis. The technology wouldn't be able to read their face correctly. Another example is for a student with a physical disability whose face couldn't be read properly by the FACS. There are too many outliers for the technology to be accurate, unless you had a room of children who all express their emotions like an open book.
The text also says that "most human communications are nonverbal." I agree with this statement, actually. It proves that one can never tell what a person is thinking just by what they say, or their facial expressions. The only true place you can know how somebody really feels is in their mind. I, for one, never really say or express how I feel about school infront of any sort of teacher or staff. It's a general rule among students at my school to onlt talk about teachers or lessons outside of the classroom. Now, this may not be how it is in other public school settings. If it happened to, though, then the FACS technology would be obsolete in its purpose.
Lastly, in paragraph 9, the text says that according to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, "putting on a face", or a poker face, actually trains your body to be in a better mood. This means that literally anyone could trick the FACS into thinking that they were in a happy mood when need be. Students could easily "beat the system" by manipulating the FACS into giving off a false diagnostic every time, and therefore ruining the FACS's credability. Until the FACS can tell when a group of teenagers are faking their emotions, it can't perform its main task.
In conclusion, Dr.Huang's FACS technology cannot work due to how baseless it's ethics are, how difficult it really is to understand emtions just by facial expression, and how easy it is to manipulate it's process. | 34
|
1b7279b | What are the biggest advantages of limiting car usage? Now you are probably wondering what I mean by car usage. I mean not using them so much or maybe not using them at all. You're probably thinking to your self that this is a stupid idea. You're probably right, but look at all of the up sides to it.
Think about it, if poeple stop driving motorized vehicals, there would be less smog in the air. Think about our planet, all the smog we pump out of our vehicals a day. In an artical "paris bans driving due to smog" writen by Robert Duffer, it says that Paris pumped out 147 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic meter in a week, that's a lot in one week. Also look at what smog can do, for the people with breathing problem, they'll have to wear oxygen maskes just so they can go out side. Then, a lot of plants will die not because there isn't enough carbon dioxied, the smog would be blocking out the sun light. Our planet should come first, that's why we are hear to take care of this planet.
Now think how quiet the streets would be. lets take the rurle areas for an example, there arn't any cars out their. It's nice and peaceful and you don't have worry about all the noise while your trying to take your afternoon nap. Now lets look at New York, there's nothing quiet there, theirs always cars, the noise of the cars motors running, people honking their horns and people just yell at the people in front of them because they arn't moving. I think having to deal with that every day would be annoiying.
One last thing, if people stop driving cars there would be more people walking and riding their bikes, oh and can't forget the skeatboarders. People doing that every day there would be more people in the world that would be fit. About eighty percent of America is over weight. So if we cut back on driving and start walking that percentige would go down trumendisly in a five year pirod. Also we could have more people trying out for the olympics, wouldn't that be great?
No cars sounds great to me. Now if you were going on a road trip it would be ideal to have a car for that, but in any other case you don't have use your car at all. Smog is never a great thing, it would be great to have a quiet neighborhood and there would be more fit people in the world. Over all not having cars would be great, you just don't know it yet. | 23
|
c4f0bd2 | Studying Venus is worthy pursuit despiting the danger, becuase many astronomoers are interested Venus. Astronomers think Venus might be the most, "Earth like planet in our solar system."
In the article they say that NASA is figuring out ways they can send people to Venus without being on its surface. NASA is also trying multiple ways to make their equipment more resistence to the heat in Venus.
Atronomers think that venus might compare to Earth. In the article is says, "Long ago Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life. just like Earth." Venus also has some features that look alike to Earth. in the article it also says that there were, "valleys, mountains, and craters" just like Earth.
Another way to study Venus is that NASA is creating ways to go to Venus, but not to be on its surface. NASA is wanting to have Aircraft to hover above Venus. They would use solat power for energy, but radiation would exceed earth's levels. In the article it say, " Not easy conditions but survivable for humans."
The last way to study Venus is that NASA is tesing and making material that can handle Venus's tempature. In the article it says, " Some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulation the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three week in such conditions." Another ways is to use old technology which is called mechanical computers.
In conclusion studying Venus would be a benefit for us. If atronomers are right that Venus is a look alike to Earth. We can get materials that we need or learn how to use new material that we find there. With the help of NASA making new materials and ways to get there. Atronomers can get there in no time. | 23
|
65e8227 | Dear, State senator we should keep the Electoral college. The college is a process,not a place. The process consists of the selection of the electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for president and vice. The counting of electoral voters by congress. State's entitled allotment of electors equals the number of members in its congressional delegation.
The college is widely regarded as an anachronism. The Electoral college despite its lack of Democratic Pedigree. We shouldnt have to change to election by popular vote for President. The Electoral college looks like a big help to President. The founding fathers established it in the constitution as a compromise between election of the president. The collge has many electors.270 electoral voters is required to elect the president.
Under 23rd amendemnt of constitution district of columbia is allocated 3 electors. It could be arugues the Electoral college method of selecting the president may turn off potential voters. There may be a few things i dont agree with about the Electoral college. I dont like how voters dont vote for the presidnt but for slate of electors. The Electoral college is one by far the best things, It dont need to be taken from us. Many good things the college does.
State Senator, We should keep the Electoral college. The process is great. There are many great things about the Electoral college. Its a big help with alot. Theres no dobut about the College. | 12
|
308be53 | Why The Facial Action Coding System Is Irrelevant
Sometimes people have bad days, and it can have a huge impact on others, but only if people choose to show it. Human emotion can be displayed in many ways. Some ways emotion can be expressed are through body language and facial movements/changes. However one chooses to show their emotion is all their decision, and it does not need to be known by everyone else. The Facial Action Coding Sytem is not valuable because it is a person's own choice to decide whether or not they want someone else to know how they are feeling, emotions are not relevant to students in a classroom, and there are not many ways that knowing emotions can benefit people in their careers.
A person's emotions do not involve other people. Although emotions can be caused by others, emotions do not have to be known by others. In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile", by Nick D'Alto, the author states "For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." If a person can already make a guess on how someone may be feeling on their own, why would they need The Facial Action Coding System? This would be an actual waste of technology because it would be doing a natural job that a human can do on their own.
Students in a classroom are there for learning about subjects such as math, science, language arts, and social studies, neither of which involves emotions. Bringing The Facial Action Coding System into a classroom would be more distracting than helpful. Students and teachers should be focused more on the lesson than how one is feeling during it. In the article, it says that A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored, Dr. Huang predicts." In this case, students could also become very playful with the technology and trick it to access unreliable feedback.
Knowing emotions may benefit pychologists when wanting to understand the true feelings of one of their patients in a career based setting. However, in a classroom setting, reading student's emotional expressions is not needed. Some students may not enjoy school, but they are still required to go. The article notes that Dr. Huang adds Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor. This means that not only would The Facial Action Coding System be able to read the emotions of students, but it would also takeover the job of being a teacher. This is a disadvantage for teachers since they are there to answer any questions and do the lesson planning. This would also put many teachers out of a job.
There are very few benefits, there is no relevance for knowing the emotions of students, and any emotions of a person may not want to be detected, therefore The Facial Action Coding System is not valuable. Technology is supposed to be beneficial to humans and make life easier. The Facial Action Coding System does the opposite of that. Emotions should be revealed through a person's own wish, not through a computer. This could make many people very angry, due to the programming of this technology. The goal behind The Facial Action Coding System may be to read emotional expressions, but the emotions created, by people, from being able to do so could become very upsetting. | 45
|
9cf0187 | "HONK! BEEP BEEP!." "Hey! What are you doing!? You're causing a traffic jam!" What causes a traffic jam? Cars. They get us from point A to B for sure but, do we really need to rely on them that often? I don't think so. As we limit our car usage, the air pollution lowers, fewer car accidents happens, and road rage? Gone.
Limiting car usage have many benitfits, such as the air pollution lowers. In some countries, for example Paris, they ban driving due to smog. fter near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the gobal city. As of that Monday, they would fine motorists with even-numbered license plates a 22-euro fine($31). The effect of this was that public transit was free of charge from Friday to Monday.
In Bogota, Colombia, millions of Colombians participated in a car-free day leaving the streets traffic jam free. It was their third straight year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis permitted. It didn't stop people from participating even though gray clouds that dumped occasional rain showers on Bogota. "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution" said a businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two-seat bike with his wife. This campaign began back in the mid-1990s. Without cars, parks and sports centers have bloomed throughtout the city. They even fixed the uneven pitted sidewalks and replaced them with smooth sidewalks. A city of 7 million, rush hour have dramatically cut traffic as they have their car-free day.
As for the United States, President Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions. Recent studies shows that Americans are buying fewer cars and getting fewer licenses as each year go by. Another study 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, Mr. Sivak's research has found. Without cars, people are expected to walk more and car pool with friends or take buses. This will dramatically decrease greenhouse gas and air pollution. In Barcelona, Spain, Bill Ford, executive chairman of the Ford Moter Company, has laid out a bussiness plan where they 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 impove safety.
In conclusion, by not driving a car, air pollution lowers, fewer car accidents happen, and no traffic jams. From different sources, different effects happens when cars are banned. In Paris, smog is a thing in the past, no traffic jam for a city of 7 million in Bogota, and in Barcelona, public transportations are connected and is faster to get to point A to point B. By not driving cars, we won't cause car accidents and it will improve safety for everyone. Walking never cause problems and can get you anywhere. | 12
|
ca49bac | In 1976 NASA's Viking 1 spacecraft was circling Mars when it spotted what appeared to be a likeness of a human face in a region called Cydonia. Over the years there has been speculation that this "face" was created by aliens. But over the years new equiptment has revealed the "face" for what it is: a mesa.
There are three key points of evidence that disprove the alien theory: the equiptment first used to photograph the Face on Mars is rudimentary compared to the equiptment used for the 2001 image, the sky was clear on Mars when the 2001 image was taken, and Earth has similar landforms on its surface. For example, "Each pixel in the 2001 image spams 1.56 meters, compared to the 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo." Technology has advanced much from since 1976 and 2001 image is a clear example. The 2001 image also has another detail that can't be left out: it was taken on a cloudless Martian day. A last piece of evidence sure to disprove the alien theory is the fact that Earth has similar landforms on its surface. The Face on Mars, "...is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West."
To conclude, the Face on Mars was not created by aliens. The image from 1976 was photographed with equiptment that is rudimentary compared to the equiptment used for the 2001 image, the Martian sky was cloudless when the 2001 image was taken, and the 2001 image proved that the Face on Mars is the Martian equivalent of a mesa, something commonly found on Earth. | 23
|
c623b02 | Computer driven cars, the future of cars, but is it safe or dangerous. i think dangerous for three reasons. first off what if the computer driven car malfunctions or is even hacked. secondly will they make new driving laws for these computer driven cars. and last but not least if its safe then why is it illegal.
Computer are the future,but is it for cars. Computer driven cars can be quiet dangerous. What if the car malfuntions. Feor example, your driving in the woods heading for your camping spot, but the car dosen't want to turn. Your heading for a tree and you cant pull the stearing wheel what happens next? Or what if your car is bieng hacked by an unkown person. how would the car company fix it.
Will they make new driving laws? As stated in the story"New laws will be in order to cover liability in case of an accident". "Who is held responsible the driver or the manufature". In the story it states "Presntly, traffic laws are written with the assumption that the safe car has a human driver in controlat all times". I know here already tired of the regular driving laws.
If computer driving cars are so safe why is it illegal? in the story it states "As a result in most states it is illegaleven to test computer-driven car." That dosent sound safe to me. It also states "manufatures believe that more states will follow as soon as the cars are proven to be mor reliably safe." meaning that there not safe now.
Still think that computer driven cars are still safe? i didnt because of my three reasons. What if the car malfuntions or get hacked? Will they make new laws? If it is safe why is it illegal? | 23
|
3baaf6b | In the article the author describes how a new technology called the Facial Action Coding System enables compters to identify human emotions. I Would like to have computers like that becasue I would love to know my emotions everyday. I'm pretty sure a lot of people would like to know every now and then. So, the computers are going to tell you what your emotions are and tell you the percent to how happy you are, or how disgusted, fearful, angry, and many more. The computers can calculate anyones emotion whenever they would like to know.
The computers are there for people when they want to know there emotions. Like when they are having a bad day and they want to see how sad they are. All they have to do is go to the computer to find out. If I had that computer I would most deffinetly go to it.
But since I don't have it I just figure it out on my own by just relaxing and minding my own business.
Whoever came up with the human emotion computer is very smart becasue you know how many people would go to that computer to see how upset or how angry they are. LIke expecially, when they are mad at ther boyfriend or girlfriend. Maybe they wil get mad enough to go the computer and realize that, that person isn't worth getting mad at. So, I do think those computers will come in handy. | 12
|
a5f0875 | More and more advanced technology is coming about these days. Though most of it is positive, there are always downsides to all new inventions. Driverless cars are one example of new technology. Google founder, Sergey Brin believes that these new cars could change the world but maybe not for the better as he might think. This invention is dangerous and can cause more harm than good.
People need to be the ones who are in full control of the car at all times. Having a car that does most of the driving for someone could be extremely dangerous. The car does call for some human control. This brings the chance of potential danger. You would get used to not having to drive.
All of a sudden, you must react fast and you might have to take control of your car. For you to have to take control it is probably already a scary or dangerous situation and having to react fast to controlling wouldn't help.
Everyone has expierenced a time when their technology did not work. This could pose a threat to peoples lives when it comes to these cars. One of the driverless cars could stop working one day while in the middle of driving, like cars tend to do. An accidnet could easliy be produced from such a thing happening. The driver unaware of what just happened to the car and once again having to take control quickly would be very harmful.
In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming", a passage says that the driverless cars can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves. All types of technology and products expierence malfunctions. The cars would most likely be no exception to this. This means that a car might not brake when its suppose to or it might accelerate at the wrong time.This could put the passengers in the car in a life threatening situation.
The article says there are ways to get the drivers attention when he or she needs to take over. Inventions like seats that vibrate and an annoucement made. As before, if the car was to have some sort of malfunction or had a defect it might not do these operations when or how its suppose to. Once again the people in the car are in danger that could have been prevented.
Driverless cars can cause a lot more danger than a normal car. They are not a safer or more efficient way of driving. Driverless cars should be banned
from being tested or produced. Do you want to take the risk of putting your life in the hands of a car driving itself? | 23
|
69e9bd2 | One method of chosing a President is having an electoral college here in the U.S.A. That means, the people vote for a group of electors. Not the candidate running for President. In that group they count in the votes and elect witch candidate would win.
There are many people that do no agree with this method. One should be able to put in there vote straight to who wins at an election not send it off to a group of people that one does not know. It's part of the list of rights the people should have. Any one can be a elector. In the past, an elector has change there candiate. so instead of who a person's vote going to who they voted for... it would go to the other candidate. Not everything hat should be right in this world is.
The "winner-takes-all" system is when all electors are awarded to the winning presidential candidate. This helps when it comes down to what is fair and what isn't. When Obama got 61.7 percent and Romney only had 51.3 most electoral votes were on the "winner-takes-all" basis.
Yes, it's true. Not all state has the same number of electoral votes. But that is just because not every state has the same population as one and other. If every state got the same amount of electoral votes, them it wouldn't be fair. North Carolina doesn't have the same populations as Texas. it wouldn't make sence to give them both just 3 or both 38.
People like to do things on there own and like to feel like the contrubuted to socity. One should vote for themselfs on who should run our country. An electoal college is not needed anymore. | 23
|
a645234 | a time in the futur where no one needs to buy cars because there will be a fleet of driverless cars is not a safe futur. In paragraph nine the article says "most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers, and pedestrians safe, and lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers." Making a driverless car removes the alert driver wright out of the eqation. And a car without an alert driver isnt a safe car, at least not in law makers eyes.
In states like California, Nevada, Florida, and the district of columbia it is illegal to test computer driven cars. The rest of america should follow suit though the article says, " manufactures believe that more states will follow as soon as the cars are proved more reliably safe." For the time being there not safe enough. though there are constant development being made to the driverless car. There are still to many hole in the ideal to make a safe apperance on the road.
one of the advancements is that the cars have "Traffic Jam Asstancet." the article say 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." If the driverless car cant handle a workzone or accident. Then it diffinitly can't handle roads with wondering children and dogs.
drivers get distracted while driving there self driven cars. they couldn't handle a driverless one. | 23
|
4fa782f | In this argument I'm going to tell you why the face on Mars, is acually a landform.
On the red planet called Cydonia A.K.A Mars. Twenty five years ago NASA Viking 1 spacecraft was circling around Mars snapping photos of landing sites when they came across a landfrom that looked like a human face. When scientist saw the picture they thought it was just another martian mesa, that is common around in Mars, but it had unusual shadows that made it look like a Egyptian Pharaoh. A few days later NASA showed the image for all to see. The caption was "huge rock formation...which resembles a human head...formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes,nose, and mouth." They thought it would be a good way to attract attention, but some people think the face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars. Meanwhile, defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an acient civilization in Mars, although few scientist believed the face was an alien artifact. The first image appered on a web site, revealing... a natural landform it was actually a martian equivalent of a butte or mesa landform common around the american west
That was my argument I hope you will take my side that the face was not created by aliens and it was mearly a landform. | 12
|
212f1e9 | Facial action coding system, is a source of technology that knows how your feeling through facial recongnition. It is used to identify with the muscle movments on a human face. Using this type of technology to read emotional expressions in a classroom filled with students shouldn't be valuable.
Yes the Facial Action Coding System is helpful with identifying exactly how your feeling, but why in a classroom filled with students? Having computers know exactly how they're feeling isn't something that students
would be able to be
comfortable with. If someone isn't happy, the computers shouldn't have to be programmed to go out of its
way to help a
person doesn't
want to be helped.
In the article in paragrph 3
it states that there are 44 major
muscles in a model that move just like a humans face to identify facial expressions. With that kind technology with the
computers knowing, its an invasion of privacy
to
the students. Students like to to keep to themselves, keeping
their
emotions private. Paraghraph 5 It states that humans can also read eachothers facial expressions. Why let a computer find out what your feeling when humans can do the same thing? Also in paragraph 7 it shows steps on how to encode different emotions, the students don't even need
that sort of technology if they can find out what theyre feeling for themselves.
This is why using the
Facial Action Coding System shouldn't be valuable. That students don't need advance technology to read exactally what they're feeling. That humans should be able to read eachothers emotions or just keep it to themselves either a device knowing. | 23
|
2c7d7f3 | I think that the use of technology to read the emotions of students in a classroom is valuable , because they can read how you feel as in if you are happy Susan can read how happy a person is , she can read if something is discusting to you as an example bugs , they are gross if Lola had seen a bug she would get sick to her stomach. Computers can also read if you are scared or angry If there was a painting hanging on a random wall she could read who made the panting, what brand of colors used, which type of paint brushes invested , she could even find out where the painting was created and or if robert was still alive . It's actuallyamazing how computers can even tell what state or city the painter was from and also about his colleauges he worked with. These computers can construct a 3-D computer model of the face too. | 12
|