Datasets:

prl90777

/

essay_100_4

like 0

74ec2b2

Nearly everyone in the United States has a car, if they're of age. Many people would probably argue that they need cars. How else would you get somewhere? Well, there are plenty of alternatives to driving, and other ways to just cut back. Limiting car usage has become rather popular recently. Even though there are some disadvantages from limiting car usage, there are so many more advantages that are extremely beneficial. Pollution has always been a big problem almost everywhere in the world, and cars have a huge influence on it. Pollution can affect people's health and damages the environment. In Paris they put up a partial driving ban to clear up horrible smog. "Congestion was down 60 percent in the captial of France, after five-days of intensifying smog..." (Source 2). It only took one day of a driving ban to clear up the smog. Imagine how much less pollution there would be if people limited driving for multiple days, even maybe weeks, or months? It's not like you have to permanently give up driving, just limit it when you can. Limiting car usage can also help reduce stress levels and make you happier. It might sound crazy at first because, well how would you get places? Wouldn't that cause more stress? Vauban, a city in Germany, is a city that "forbids" parking, driveways, and houses with garages. They strategically put stores and buildings within an idealistic walking distance. "'When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way,' said Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two" (Source 1). If a working mother can do it, so can you. When you're always inside and juggling your kids and their needs, you'll most likely be tense and always feel busy. When you have no other option, besides paying over fourty grand for a space in a parking garage, than to walk somewhere, you'll get to be outside and experience socialization and the fresh air. In my opinion that sounds way better than being confined to a little car when you have to go somewhere. Obviously there are uncountable benefits that come from limiting car usage. I don't know about you, but honestly I would prefer limited car usage. Until someone takes action to start making it easier to access places we would normally need our car to get to, limiting car usage is not going to be easy.

34

e2ba02d

Computer Cars Would want a computer driving your car with your five month baby in the car? I strongly dissagree, I wouldn't let a computer drive my car! I personal think that the Driverless Cars are too risky. Therefore I dissagree with the Driverless Cars because its dangerous, laziness and expensive. The Driveless Cars ways are way too dangerous . What happens if the sensors doesn't go back to driver? The car will crash at some put of the place you going. The driveless Cars gets its battery ran down way too fast and that can be very dangerous, because the car can shut down. The car won't be able to you it's contact any emergancy savers becuase it wouldn't have any battery. Secondly , getting a Driverless car is being lazy. It's already unhealthly that we drive cars, and now it's going to be an computer driving the car. Some scientisits belive that the Driverless Car can cause the world to have everything done by any computer . That mean the world wouldn't be healthly because, everything would be done for us. Thirdly I think the Driveless Car is too expensive. The driverless car cost millions of dollars and that is bad. If the car breaks down it would be even more expensive. I think you shouldn't waste you live savings on that junk ! Inconclusion Driverless Cars are stupid! The car is dangerous and expensive . Driving the car will be

12

3aedf9d

Dear Mr. Senator, The citizens of your state are crying injustice, but nothing is being done to serve them. The Electoral College goes against the Bill of Rights opening words of "We the People". The current system of electing the President is more complex and less beneficial than choosing our leader through popular vote. The popular vote actually listens to the people of the United States' opinion and how they want this country run. The Electoral College has many faults such as in the case of electoral overuling popular vote, possible corruption of state senators (no accusation presented), and could lead to the rare event of a tie. Such as in the election of 2000, Al Gore should have won the race. The people poke through the popular vote to choose him, but the Electoral College thought otherwise. As stated in the article, that usually state senators choose the representatives of the state in the Electoral College, if bribery and corruption affect our nations such as those in the Miuddle East, the presidential race can and will be rigged in one party's favor. Due to Mane and Nebraska policy of "proportional representation" could lead to a tie. As you can see, the Electoral College has many faults and is outdated due to the rapid population increase of our nation and reasons stated above. Some may argue there will be inaccuracies with popular vote whereas we already use the popular vote today as a way of forecasting the oucome and seeing the people's real choice. Thank you for your time Mr. Senator. Sincerely, PROPER_NAME      

23

9483182

Driverless cars should not be legal. Driverless cars may have some benefits, but there are far more flaws then there are benefits. Driverless cars are not even fully controlled automatically on thier own. Liability for any injuries is a question that needs to be adressed. Does the company or the customer take responsibily for any injuries that may occur while driving the car? Driverless cars have very few benefits. One being they drive on their own. Another being they have a system that alerts you when you are in danger. Although these functions are quite amazing, there are some flaws to the system. The driverless cars are not fully able to driver on their own. They may require you to take over driving if put in a certain situation. Some examples of this sitituation are, if the car has to move around an accident, if the car is going through a construction zone, or if the car is going into a changed area where the GPS in the car is not up to date on. Also the car has a system that alerts you when you are in danger. This requires you to be awke and aware just incase this alert comes on. What is the point of having a driverless car if you all your doing is waiting till the car asks you to take over driving? A extremely thought about issue is liablilty. Who is the one to take responsibily if something goes wrong and an injuty occurs? For this car to become completely legal there would have to be a law passed to show who would take responsible in a certain sitiuain if anyone was injured. Also if you think deep you are putting your life in the hands of some metal and wired object that moves on four wheels. There are so many problems that occur with cars that you have to operate on your own, and now they want to make a car that drives it self legal. Driverless cars should not be legal because there are many saftey issues that need to be addresed, and also many laws that need to be made. In order for this car to become legal, it is asking for a lot just for something as a little as a not fully autommactic drving car.

23

06cb1df

Why is the planet Venus called Venus though? This story explains how the solar system is used. I think challenge of exploring Venus is a great story explaining how it's a safe envoirment, and the solar is very powerfull. The author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy puruit despite the dangers is in paragraphs one, three,and five. In paragraph one it saids " While Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth, it has proved a very challenging place to exmine more closely " saying that the author explains how Venus is a worthy danger. In paragraph three it states that " Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experince on our own planet." this talks about how danger is a priority now dealing with the temperatures. It also saids " Venus has th hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun." This was talking about how the author explains the facts of our solar system. In paragraph five it states " Solar power would be plentiful and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." This was talking about Solar power concern and how the author supports the idea of the whole Venus solar system. In conculsion i think the author supports the idea of studying Venus is worthy and how it's very important to our solar system.

12

2b057fb

I am aginst the development of driverless cars. I am aginst driverless cars because they could be very dangerous machines, the text states "...The human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." In other words the human must take action when the car doesn't know what to do and this could be very dangerous if the car doesn't stop driving or alert you soon enough to take the wheel. Another reason for being aginst the development of driverless cars is if the vehical is one hundred percent driverless then it means you are being transported by one big computer and like other computers under the wrong conditions it will crash. If there were driverless cars not everyone would be able to afford them so the cars on the streets today would have to be extra careful when around a driverless car because they don't know if it could mess up and make them wreck. Also if there was a situation where a driver of a regular car made a mistake the driverless car wouldn't have the reaction time of a human to avoid any crashes and that would put the ones in the driverless car is a paranoid state until reaching their destination. The development of driverless cars would mean more regulations and rules on transportation which might not be a good thing. If there were more regulations and rules regarding the driverless cars there would also be more loop holes in that part of the justice system. These visions of a future with driverless cars should be left at just visions because of the dangers and unessesary risk of getting to a destination a bit sooner. It is because of the reasons stated above that I am aginst the development of driverless cars.

23

2a52391

I agree that this technology is hepful, I believe it can help a lot of different people in many ways. I believe that this could be helpful because some kids/adults go through hard times and turn to death as an option. Many others may not agree with this technology because they don't want help nor do they want their emotions being able to be detected. This type of technology could help others in a various amount of ways. Here are some examples, a kid at home could be upset and the parents will never know because they don't pay attention to their childs emotions. The parents would be required to do an everyday scan so they are aware of their childs emotions. Some parents could find out how their kids really feel and get them help. This technology could keep the suicide rate from uprising. Doctors could use this in their offices to help patients. Especially infants, infants can't state how they feel. The doctor could scan the babies face and see their emotion. " Eckman has classified six basic emotions- happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness." Those six emotions detectors could be very helpful. Who knows they might even come up with more emotions to detect. This could help large amounts of people. So I agree with this technology.

23

1833139

"Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of Density and size, and occassionally the closest in distance too." Venus is a planet that holds many mysteries and scientist want to study Venus to see why the planet is so innhabitable as well as Geological. Venus is worth Studying because of how much geological studies and mysteries can be found and solved in such a matter of time. Scientist can not go to Venus because of how inhabitable it is. Venus is 97% Carbon Dioxide and has "Highly corrosive sulfuric acid in the atmosphere." There is more, In Paragraph 3 it says, "On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 Degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 time greater than what we experience on our own planet." Venus has a hotter surface temperature then Mercury as well. Even Though Venus is so inhabitable The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has an idea to send humans in a blimp like vehicle to be hovering over Venus. In Paragraph 5 it says "Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth Levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." So it could be done, but it would be a challenge. NASA Has had many ideas (Even in progress) which have to relate to Venus. Of Course researchers and scientist can get Photographs and 3D Models of the Planet, They say it is still not enough. There are other approaches for studying Venus. For Example, In Paragraph 7 it talks about Simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber to simulate the chaos and wreckage of Venus's Surface. They simulate for 3 weeks as well. They are trying new types of metals to simulate and test to see if the metal can withstand the pressure and heat of Venus's Surface. I personally think that the research should be tested and researched. I think this because Venus is a planet that many people do not know much about. Even Scientist do not know much about the planet. In Paragraph 8 it says,"Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only becuase of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. Our Travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers an doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation." It is a curious question, What is Venus really like? But I believe scientist will figure it out. Venus will most likely be studied and Scientist and researchers should have there answer soon.

34

f2b3076

Its a great idea to have something read what your're feeling. That way teachers can know what there students are feeling. That can also help the teacher to find ways to help the student. The person reading the other person feelings can know how that person is feel so that way they can help them out. Like if the person is feeling sad,mad,or similar feelings like that they will know that they have to try to find a way to cheer them up. This would be a great expirces that teachers can try and also students,other people. Peolpe can learn new things like how to cheer up a friend. Or how to make someone feel better. This is a good resorceful way to use technolgy. We should be using technoligy for good not bad and this would be a good way. That way from this expirement we can learn to make other ways to use it for good.

12

48f888b

The author supports this idea because from reading the passage he suggests that Venus is a very interesting planet but it's also dangerous. In paragraph 1 it says "Venus, sometimes called the "Evening Star ," is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky. " which is one of the couple of things that make Venus a worthy pursit like it's said. Another thing that is interesting is that Venus is the closest planet to Earth in density and in size also in distance. Also no spacecraft has survied to land for more than a couple of hours in more than three decades. One of the few things that make Venus a dangerous planet is that it's the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system as said in paragraph 3. Also "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. " the planet's surface temperature average is over 800 degrees. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and it includes familiar features such as valley and mountains. In paragraph 7 it states that NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus and they're making simplified electonics to test more of Venus's surface but the devices that are being made only last about 3 weeks because of the heat and the conditons of the surface.

12

b961e76

Dear Senator, I am a student writing to you that we should be changing the Electoral College, to the election by popular vote. If you change the voting system to the elcetion by popular vote, then people are able to vote for who they want to vote, rather than having someone for president as a mistake during the voting. I believe that people should have the right to vote based on the president, not the slate of electors. Also because of the "disaster factor," and because of the "winner-take-all" system. First off, you should change the system to the election by popular vote, because people should be able to vote based on the president and not the slate of electors. It is not fair that the people who pick the electors are people from the states convention, party's central committee or the candidates themselves. The voters should be allowed to controll who their electors vote for. Since they are part of the country, they should have a say in the country too. We should not be confused about the voting for the "wrong" electors, but be able to know what we are doing. Secondly, may I recall the "disaster factor," the biggest crisis the century? The Louisiana legislature back in the 1960's, they had some trouble in replacing the Democratic electors with new electors. In fact, they almost did not succeed in doing this. The state's legislatures are probably the ones who are responsible for this incident, because of picking the electors themselves. By keeping the Electorial college, you could probably make the same mistakes again. Lastly, another reason why we should change the voting system to the election by popular vote is, because of the "winner-take-all" system. Candidates runing for president know they have no chance in winning, if they spend their time in the wrong states. So instead they spend all their time in states are probably going to vote for them. All in all, we should not be keeping the Electorial college, because its unfair to voters who don't know the real reason why they voted for a candidate, people also do not want to make the mistakes they made in the past, and the "winner-take-all" system is just irrational.    

34

a657a2a

I am against the idea of the driveless cars. What would be the point of getting a license if your not the one driving the car. It takes the fun out of driving. I am also against the idea because it will make people want to look at their cell phone knowing that the car is driving and not them and it will create a habbit when it is their turn to drive the car. What happens if someone got into a wreck and died? This could change the world as we know it. After these driveless car will be flying cars then everyones own personal rockets and so on. This will also make people lazy by having a car drive itself. What would be the point of even having a car. I understand that it would be fasinating to just be able to sit and look around at stuff on the way to your destination or even just relax. Why not just stop and explore? Why not just have gas stations fill up your gas for you, or even robots do your own homework or chores? I conclusion, I think that creating driveless cars is not a very good idea because it will just make people lazy. It will make them more distracted than being more foccused on the road. They will text more and call more when driving on the road.

12

fba7e12

There are many things a computer can do and could tell you if it could. Computers know many things about you and what things you like without even telling you, it comes from your way of expression and thinking. Would it be cool determine how someone really feels by using an computer software? Yes it could. For example students in a classroom when you look around people around you might have different expressions when it comes to different things. Some expressions can't be determined always by an human eye, people around you may look sad or happy and etc. but, that is only what you see within the human eye. All people have many different expressions than just one expression that you in your class may appear to see. Expression is determined not only by how the face looks like or how the mouth looks, It is all determined by the muscles in the human face like cheek bones. All the studies made by you and others, not always computer or any source of science. This person named Dr. Huang thought in his head that computers can already determine many things in a humans preference by the things a human finds appealing or disturbing. Dr. Huang predicted that since the web can determine all things by preferences it could the modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor. Most people spend many hours nonverbal and on technology to realize how a person might feel next to them without even paying attention so Dr. Huang noted that and figured out computers know so much that they could understand that too. Like mirriors or anything that is reflectable can determine how you may feel when you look at yourself no matter if you groom or stare. If your in a classroom a teacher, computer, etc might ask you to describe a picture which I know this happened many times before, but it might ask and people may give variety answers that you might think is right as well. With an software it can determine how the person or something might really feel. By the help of professor Thomas Huang and Nicu Sebe they decided to create a 3-D model on a software with 44 different muscle models like humans facial expressions and did test to figure the percentage of an human face isn't that cool. This came to use on the Mona Lisa painting by Leonardo Da Vinci. Leonardo studies of anatomy which he uses on the painting made it look like he painted a lady which appeals to be smiling but also has other expressions which was also thought by the two scientists. The fundamentals of the computers unique ways gave percentages of the painting. How you might ask? By the following of stretched muscles which are called zygomatic and different muscles called risorius. This is amazing so even using this can determine how a person feels in your daily life especially being around others in a classroom because maybe not everyone might feel the same as you might. It also gives more descriptions of how a person may feels than how you may think within the human eye. This could be helpful all around the human community studies of others. Instead of asking people whats wrong or how they are feeling you would already know by using the Facial Action Coding System. Do you think your guesses of how you may feel or others is right? Give the system a check maybe it might prove you wrong?

34

7ca5e5f

So you think that aliens created the face that is on Mars? That is funny, there hasn't been any sign of aliens found yet anywhere. The shape made is most likely a cowensidence. It is also made up from shadows that are on the planet. If you look in the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars" it will tell some of the facts that are givin in the paragraph above. My team at NASA were deffinitly in shock,we had thought that it looked like a egytion head. We observed it for a minit and then laughed it off. But like I said before it is an elosion and it was just shadows that were on the planet. I am guessing that some of the featers are also from craters on the planet. Im going to take a shot in the dark and say that you most likely thought it was from aleins becuase you have seen it on TV and you have to beleave every thing on Telivision. Well what about this,the weather man said it was supposed to be rainy out side and was going to have a temperture of 45 degrees,well it is bright out side and 70 degrees. Are you seing my point now? The movie you might see might have something that seems to be very full of facts and might seem real but anyone can do that but still lie. Some people said Neal Armstrong was fake and a set up on Telivisoin,just for show you might say. But we have evidence ulike you. We have photo graphs and things that came off of the planet. Don't you dare try to argue with someone that knows what they are talking about and has worked in this kind of inviroment. You might not beleave it but you have to learn things from the past that happened at the station and things that have been descovered,so that you don't think that you found something new but in reality you are trying to do reaserch on something from long ago. Now tell me again why you think a fictional character would have made a face on a planet. Ohh yes thats wright becuase you can sit on a coach and beleave some shiny screen tryed telling you. Now does that mean you really think you think something like Big foot also egsist. Does that mean that you saw that movie Planet of the Apes and thought that there might be a planet that apes rule a world and have humans work for them. You seem like a bit of a fool if you think that,that would be true. Come on use a bit of common since and past knowledge. Didn't you ever pay attention in school?

12

33e61e9

Let me tell you about my life i am a young kid who just grauated from high school who didnt think my life would change this quick. I work two part time jobs trying to make money. The first job i was at was the grocery store. The second job i was at was the bank. The Seagoing Cowboys program is a program that takes care of horses,young cows and mules. This program giving people lots of good opportunitys in life. If you joined this program u could do lots of differents. You would not just do one thing all the time. When you are on board you can have lots of things to do its not always boring. After all the aniamls have unloaded u can can play lots of games. Like for an example the cowboys played baseball and volleyball. There all way more fun things to do then that. Think of all the different place they went. For an example they went to Europe,China and Italy. In all those diffrent place they went to it wasnt just a boring trip. Like when they in Italy they got to take a gondola ride. In conclusion,there are lots of reasons why you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program. Just dont join because u were ask to. They give you lots of opportunity in life that you many never get in life. If you join is program im sure you wont be let down.

12

9b852ba

Is it good to limit car usage? If the usage of cars are limited their would be less greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Greenhouse gasses are responsible for global warning and the melting of the polar ice caps. If you limit the amount of car usage their would be less cars on the road and it would by a lot quieter at night. In some parts of the United States 50% of the greenhouse gas emissions are from passender cars. thats a sign that we need to stop relying on cars so much. The fact is that if were our passenger cars are giving off that much greenhouse gasses, than our cars are giving off the most greenhouse gasses and its time to make a change. If you want to help cut back on the greenhouse gas emission than only use your car if your giong a far distance. you dont need to use your car to go down the street, or around the block. You should use your car to go anywhere in your neighborhood thats walking distance. So next time your about to get in your car think about if you really need to take your car.

12

938a199

Dear Senator, I believe that people like Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and Bob Dole were all right in saying the electoral college should be abolished. I have two simple reasons for this. One being that it is not a 100% way to elect a entire nations leader for four years. The other reason being that 60% of people don't even want it. First off, the process of the elcetoral college isn't always accurate. For example, in 2000, Al Gore ran for office against George W. Bush. During this election, Al Gore won the votes of the people, but lost in electoral votes, giving the presidency to George. Since we all know how his presidency turned out, we wonder how Gore would've handled things. Voters cannot always control who their electors vote for, which means if an elector is chosen to vote for Billy Joe, he might just decide, when it becomes time, to vote for Jimmy Washington. This would leave voters of that candidate upset, so maybe they too will understand this flawed system. Another reason we need to abolish the electoral college is something we like to call the disaster factor. This is nothing compared to what happened in 2000; the system allows for much worse. Consider that a states legislature is technically responsible for picking said states electors. Also consider that said elector could always defy the will of the people. In 1960, the Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing democratic electors with new ones who would oppose John F. Kennedy. In the same vein, electors without faith, have occasionally refused to vote for their party's canidate and cast their vote for whomever they please. Ask yourself Senator, if this were to happen again, would you do what is right and try to dispose of this system? I hope so. In reference to my second point, do you realize that (According to a Gallup poll) 60% of our people don't even want this system. The way I see it, if i asked three people if I should buy a new car or a used car, and two out of the three say I should buy a used one, I'm not going to go buy a new car despite them. This is the same with the electoral college. We shouldn't be forcing this corrupt way of decididng this nations leader for the next four years, down their throat. This nation is based on beliefs that include the peoples right to have a say in how this nation is goverened. It's so simple, a majority of the people are against the electoral college, so it needs to go. If you, like 60% of the United States agree with my points and views on the electoral college, then you need to do what you can with your authority, to put a stop to it. All in all, I have strong beliefs, like most Americans, that the electoral college is a corrupt way of giving this great nation to somebody who people think don't deserve it. Based on my emphasis of these two reasons that this failing system needs to go, I think you , Senator, need to put all your power into the downfall of it.

34

bfb3334

This special artifact that was found on Mars might have been created by aliens, or a Martian mesa. On May 24, 2001 NASA's Viking 1 was circling around mars. Something different happened that made TV, magazines, even Hollywood. Viking 1 captured a picture of a FACE on mars. At the time no one knew what made this but NASA did have plenty enough of ideas to figure it out sooner or later. An argument would be is are aliens actually real or are they a mythical creature that people say is real. The man NASA is talking to would have to find out himself and so would NASA. NASA has plenty enough cameras in space to know if there are actually aliens up in space. This could have been created by a Martian mesa. The face might of had many weird, or unusual shadows. The only problem would be is there aliens in different Galaxies, or on different planets like the ones in our Galaxy the Milkyway. The Aliens could have flew over and made a face on Mars, or carved it themselves. The problem with the Martian mesa is the shadow could have been created by the camer or ship that was flying around the planet Mars. The was to prove them wrong though is, we have been studying and flying cameras out into space for awhile and have been searching for aliens the whole time. NASA's cameras are still in space and they are still searching. The Shadow was to large to be created by the ship or camera that was flying around mars. The shadow could have been around Cyndonia which is common.

12

bfff92e

In the article talk about Driver cars, and can you imagine a time in the future when no one buys cars? Sergey Brin envisions a future with a public transportation like cars form a public-transport taxi system. He believes such car would change the world. In 2009 has specific conditions. There cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash. I think so than use cars in the actually is very important, can you move in other places or country with a car, but has a probability of to have an accident in the way. In paragraph 3 talk over General Motors created a concept car thah could run on a special test track. Is created in 1950 with an electrical cable and Engineers at Berkeley. During the years Google's modified Toyata and uses position-estimating sensors, a video camera, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver and many things more. In paragraph 5 talk about sensors are nothing new, In the 1980s, automarkers used speed sensors for crearion brakes. In alll information than have the cars during 10 years the sensors are advanced, and have power individual engine. Sebastian Thrun, founder of the Google car project, believes that the technology before 2000 and cost two hundred million dollars. He buys at Radio Shack. In the paragraph 7 talk abuot than in 2013, the BMW announced the development of "Traffic Jam Assistan." In this year the changes are many like the Google announced new laws or like driver, The physical aspects of automation are really a challenge for Dr Werner Huber of the BMW project manager. Automarkers are continuing their work and has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 percent like Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan they have a project in 2020 in to have new shapes in the cars, or to give functions for the community during the years, because is very importan to know over many things in the actually and have a good grow in the destination every day with people than make a good job in the community.

01

9be0af0

In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" I disagree with the authors claim strongly. One of the reasons I diagree with this claim is because in the passage it says"Each previous mission was unamnned ,and for a good reason,since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. This tells me as a reader that why should we take such a big risk on losing so much money on a mission if we can barely survive on the surface for a few hours. Also the clouds on venus are made out of highly corrosive sulfuric acid. The surface tempature on venus averages 800 degrees Fahrenheit,and the atmospheric preasure on venus is 90 times greater then what humans experience on earth. This tells me as a reader that trying to explore venus would be a great challenge and would have a lot of consequences to it. The idea of Nasa of having a blimp like vehicle hovering 30 miles above the roiling Venusian landscape is basically pointless. The humans that would live on these vehicles would have to live through harsh conditions but they can survive. Why would you put someones life in danger and have them suffer for a planet that we cannot live..Even if we did this mission we wouldnt be able to take photographs and videography since the atmosphere is so thick. In The passage also says"More importantly,researchers cannot take samples of rock,gas,or anything else from a distance". This means that we wouldnt be able to take anything off the planet and all the mission would be good for is sightseeing. In conclusion I disagree with the author and his claim saying that studying venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger it presents. The reason i say this is because exploring venus has to many risks and it could cost lives of humans. In my point of view humans are priceless and they should not risk their lives on a planet that is not habitable. Also even if the mission was sucessful we would not gather many samples on venus due to the fact that the atmosphere is so thick and the conditions on venus is unhabitable. I personally believe that maybe in the future we should have a mission to venus ,but right now knowing all the risks that exploring venus has, that we should work on the technology more and make sure that in the future exploring venus and learning more about it will be possible in the future.

23

743acd8

I feel that keeping the Electoral College is the wrong way to go. That changing it to election by popular vote is a better decision. Because the people of our nation should be able to choose who they want to be the president not the 538 electors. Why not have the whole nation vote for who they want and who ever has the majority of the votes win? That sounds like a fair election to me! The electoral college has so many faults, that just one little tiny mishap can cause a huge disater within the election. The electoral college does have some advantages. Like swing states, or avoiding run-off elections . But it also has disadvantages for example it takes so many risks, its unfair to voters, its outdated, and irrational. The electoral college cheats the people who are voting. I mean they didn't sign up or vote for the electors NO, they did it for the president. So why not give them that chance? It makes it easier on other people and the election is a fair one. The picking and choosing of the electors is unorganized. Each year its a different person. Sometimes state conventions, sometimes the states party's central committee, and sometimes the presidential candidates themselves. Voters that go and vote for which ever president they want, really aren't even voting for the president their voting for that president's elector. Which is someone who goes and votes for that president that picked them as their elector. And sometimes the voter that is actually voting for the elector to vote for their assigned president will end up voting for a different president. Also voters will sometimes get confused about all these electors and vote for the wrong candidate. So in conclusion, changing from Electoral College would be the best choice to make. Because election by popular vote for the president isn't so complicated, is more reliable, isn't so risky, and most importantly the voters get a fair election.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

23

7c244f3

Driverless cars to some may be benificial and I'm all for it. The news is on everyday and there's atleast one incident where "a car ran off the road" or "there's a traffic jam from a car crash." Would this happen with driverless cars? I don't think we would have as many car wrecks, slideoffs, and traffic jams if we had driverless cars. I feel the streets would be more safe and run extremely smoother, then they are now. As we all know It's 2016 and we're only moving further and further into technology. Driverless cars are only the next big thing and they're being noticed more and more everyday. All these manufacturers and car companies are trying to come up with the safest driveless cars as possible and that's just what they're doing. Do you think the first car invented had all these gadgets we have now? No, they had no gps, airbags, or these car sensors we have now, but we grew in technology and made them more safe. The biggest thing that's stopping driverless cars from being on the streets in my opinion is safety. Nobody has saw driverless cars on the street, so we don't know how to react to something so new. Driverless cars would have all of these sensors that will keep the car from crashing or breaking speed limits. These driveless cars are only mimicing a human at the wheel, but these signals and sensors are way safer then a humans senses and signals. These driverless cars will open up doors for many future inventions. Back in the 1900's they weren't expecting there to be all of this technology, but there is. Technology is only going to grow and grow. What we need to do is adapt to these new inventions and make the best of them because next week you might see Toyota come out with a flying car. Just think to yourself " could you see driverless cars on the street or even see yourself in one?" Well my answer is yes because we need more safety on the streets and obviosly people can't do it themselves so why not give technology a chance? Driveless cars would change the world and maybe the world needs a change, but the world definitley need safer streets.

34

bffde1f

I think it would be helpful for students in the text it says that a classroom computer could recognize when a student is becomeing confused or bored, ''Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor. I know how that feels when you get that way when you are on a lossen and you dont understand a lesson. but some people might not like that because they might be contused or bored but they might like to have a chaleng and if they chang the lesson to make it esery they might get frostrated at the program. you have to think about the other sied of this argumint some you might be mad a some one else or be upset about some thing else and the computor might think you are upset with the lesson a chang it and everyone shows there emotions deffrint so how would the conpter know how you show yours , and it does say in the text that is still working on the moldel of the face. it says that all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. And that might take awiel. I would love for this to work someday i think it would help me alot because i hate useing computers i like haveing a techer tech me and if i could have a computer that asked like a humen and knew when i was confused with a lossen and help me with it or even chang it to a lees cofusing losson that would be grusgt so i hope this works one day.

12

32f232d

The new technology called Facial Action Coding System identify humans emtions yes i do believe this use of technology to read classrom students emotions is valuable. I think it is valuale because i am a classroom student and the teachers dont seem to notice when the students are getting bored or arent paying attention to be able to learn and with this technology it well notice and it will change alot because the teacher can change how they teach maybe do other things get us moving get us wanting to learn. Many kids cant sit down for long they lose focuse. In the reading it said the technogology can read when the student is "confused or bored" with that the teacher can ask the student are you bored or confused based on what they say the teacher can ask if he/she is bored the teacher can do moving around assienment to learn that little thing will help the students. If he/she is confused the teacher can ask what they are confused about most students never want to tell the teacher if he/she is confused or dont understand something with this technology it will help the teacher help that student because students tend not to want to raise their hand and ask for help.Or with the technology its self in the reading it says "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor". I think they should give this technolgy to all schools it will help out the teachers alot, the students will aslo find it cool seeing if it really does tell their emotion. If they want this technology to be the new teachers they should start off small try it out with one class for awhile but i really think this technology will be really cool.

23

cb5293e

Have you ever heard of venus? Well if you haven't ill you all i know about it. Venus used to be able to live on. Then it became overrun by thunder and earthquakes that now is pretty much you can't live on anymore. Venus is secound planet from our sun. Once you were able to live on Venus but now its dangerous to even get near it. It was probaly once beauitful and now its destroyed. "Long ago, Venus was probaly covered largely with oceans and could have supported varioius forms of life, just like earth."(4) Humans could of maybe lived there. It could of supported humans and other forms of life. Now to this day it isn't in living conditions. In conclusion, Venus was a great planet and was able to be lived on until the earthquakes started happening. Venus and Earth were once twins until Venus was destroyed. This shows that there are probaly many others planets that were like Venus out there. There are many dangers of going to Venus because of the pressure being different. You could die by being crushed because the pressure is different there.

12

3015118

Since the finding of the face on Mars in 1976 many people have been saying that it must have been made from aliens on Mars. However this is not true. If there was life on Mars NASA would have found it by now because it would benefit them. "Some people think the Face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars-- evidence that NASA would rather hide, say conspiracy theorists. Meanwhile, defenders of the NASA budget wish there was an ancient civilization on Mars." (Pg 5) So therefor the Face on Mars is just a natural landform because of the amount of pictures taken of Mars and the face, the amount of time taken to research the Face and all of the NASA people saying it resembles natural landforms that are on Earth. First off we know that the Face on Mars is just a natural landform because of all the pictures that were taken. If there was any alien life of any kind on Mars, NASA would have caught it. In the article it says, "'Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution.' Each pixel in the 2001image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo." (Pg 10) The author of the article went into even more detail and said, "So, if there were objects in this picture like airplans on the ground or Egytian- style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!'"(pg 11) This explains how good the camera quality is and how they wouldn't be able to miss anything. Including the amount of picture evidence against life on Mars and the fact that the Face was not made by extraterrestrials, the amount of time spent researching the face by NASA clearly shows they know what they're talking about. The first picture of the face was taken in 1976 and then it was a major hit and they took another picture 12 years later in 1998. Then again after that in 2001. Also in the article it says, "And so on April 5, 1998, when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camer (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos" (pg 7) This quote from the article shows to what extent NASA researchers went to to find out more about the Face. As if there is not already a bunch of reasons why the face on Mars is just a landform, a group of people are agreeing with NASA's decision that the face is just a natural landform. According to the article it says, "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." (Pg 2) Also stated in the article, "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivelant of a butte or mesa-- landforms common around the American West. 'It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of idaho,' says Garvin." Those quotes in the article are proof that those same types of landforms happened here on Earth as well and the ones here were not made by aliens. In conclusion the Face on Mars is just a natural landform. If there was aliens on Mars making landforms then NASA would definetely use that for publicity and to make the taxpayers happy. However there are no aliens on Mars making landforms and NASA knows this because of the time they have taken to research this along with the amount of pictures taken with high quality cameras and the resemblance of the landform to landforms on Earth.

45

50c1d54

Driverless cars are becoming a reality in the world. They are a great way for drivers to relax, and hold conversations on a road trip without worrying about wreaking the car. I believe that the driverless care is a revolutionary idea for the modern age. In my essay I will talk about why the driverless car is a great idea, what are some of the things drivers can do if they get the driverless car, and why I believe that the driverless car is the future of the world. I believe that the driverless car as a revolutionary idea becasue of how awesome it is. Now that there is a driverless car this could be the opening of a door for other things such as pilotless planes, or driverless boats. This idea can change the way transportation is for the future of the world. Most people would really love the idea of not having to drive unless there is something like a hazard that would require human interaction. This is how I think this idea Is revolutionary. Secondly I believe that the plan is a great idea. I say this because with the driverless car road trips can become more fun. If a group of friends wants to travle from Indianapolis to Dallas No one would love to be the driver for that trip. This idea would mean the driver would only have to drive in an emergency situation like a wreak, or construction. The driver can sit back, and become a passenger like his friends. This is why I believe that the driverless car is a great idea. Finally, Imagine all of the things that someone could do with a driverless car. Say that someone is late for work, and has not brushed their hair, or brushed their teeth yet, The driverless car can give them the time to do that on the go while not risking being any more late to work. If someone is texting, and driving there would be less wreaks, because the car would be driving itself. This car opens up alot of opprotunities to be the grandfather for future technoligies, like cars that can drive drunk drivers home, or takies that drive themselves. People may say this car is dangerous, and might cause more wreaks. I say that with this car comes more opprotunities for the transportation world to advance one more step foward. In conclusion,I believe that the driverless car is the next big thing on the market. The driverless car can do alot more than the modern automobile can do. I believe that it is the most revolutionary idea, I believe that it is a good idea, and I believe that it will be the future of transportation. This is what I believe is good about the driverless car.

34

c1bec39

It is becoming increasingly evident that one part of life many older people took for granted may be going away soon. The invention of the car was revolutionary, but in modern times it seems that many wish to build communities that do not revolve around them. The reason for doing this vary somewhat across the different movements, but one main reason is that recuding car useage will reduce the amount of greenhouse gases and pollution. In fact, many places where this movement has gained traction are citites where pollution was a major issue, such as Paris and Bogota. Another factor is that many people simply are not as interested in cars as they were a few years ago, and have licenses only as a backup. The various movements are spreading all over the world, slowly but surely. "In a program that's set to spread to other countries, millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to work during a car-free day yesterday, leaving the streets of this capital city eeirly devoid of traffic jams," said Andrew Selsky of the Seattle times. Bogota, Colombia is notable for being one of the earlier players in this movement, and has shown that it can be effective. Not even rain convinced people that cars would be a better option. "These people are generating a revolutionary change, and this is crossing borders," said Enrique Riera. Not only have other Colombian cities joined in the movement, but is has inspired similar actions in other countries. It would only be a matter of time before some people would take it to the next level. "Residents of this upscale community are suburban pioneers, going where few soccer moms or commuting executives have ever gone before: they have given up their cars," said Elisabeth Rosenthal of the New York Times. While not outright banned, cars are looked down upon in this square mile rectangle, where it is much easier to simply walk or bike. The only places to park are a $40,000 parking garage and inside one's house. "...Some new suburbs may well look more Vauban-like, not only in developed countries but also in the developing world..." said Rosenthal. This approach is gainging ground, as not only does the model inherently reduce carbon emissions, but also is a sharp contrast to 1950s-style suburbs that previously dominated the land. Another probable reason, however, might be due to shifting interests. You might soon be seeing less cars in general. "...America's love affair with its vehicles seems to be cooling," said Rosenthal. America may be the home of the classic muscle car, but many people today would rather have something less flashy and more utilitarian. 2005 was the year where the most people were driving in recent times, and ever since then it has been dropping. "I think that it means something fundamental it going on," said Prof. Michael Sivak of the University of Michigan. Many people are simply losing interest in driving cars, while some people simply cannot afford them due to socioeconomic factors. Also, the advent of the Internet and social netowrking has made many people "feel more conncected" without the need to drive around in oder to meet someone in real life. If this trend continues, which it is predicted to do, then situations like what recently occured in Paris would be more readily accepted. "After days of near-record pollution, Paris enforced a partial ban to clear the air of the global city," said Robert Differ of the Chicago Tribune. It seems almost surreal for a major city to outright ban driving, but that is exactly what Paris did. Cars are occasionally banned based on their license plate, so as to still let some traffic flow while reducing smog, which had become a major problem for the city. "...[The smog] rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world," said Differ. Of all the European capitals, Paris is by far the most polluted, mostly due to a combination of warm weather and the abundance of diesel fuel. The simple act of banning driving has been a major help in reducing smog, with the skies clearing up enough for it to be considered safe for odd-numbered cars to return to the streets. It still might take some time for other cities to go to measures as extreme as Paris did, but it very well might happen eventually. The world has seen many communities test the idea of modern carless commuting for us, and we should be taking notes. While copying Paris seems like a risky way to start, communities like Vauban are excellent baby steps, and major citites like Bogota participating in these activities only once a year can get people used to the idea elsewhere. Decreasing carbon emissions is an important goal for urban areas, and for a while it seemed like cars were a neccesary evil. Now, however, it has been shown that life can go on without them. Perhaps further experiments will occur in the future that will introduce the idea to more people, letting others consider various options. Now is the perfect time to prepare for the future.

34

0187e96

Do you think you would be able to live without your car? It would be less difficult than you think! In fact, there is a whole town named Vauban, Germany, that has given up their cars! According to Source 1, street parking, driveways, and home garages are generally forbidden, unless of course you have the money to buy a parking garage space for a whopping $40,000. A citizen of the car-less town, Heidrum Walter admits, "When I had a car, I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." Passenger cars are resposible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe, and up to 50 percent in some areas of the US, according to Source 1. If only we had more towns like Vauban, maybe our impact on the world would be less destructive. Some towns ban cars for a few days at a time. Paris enforced a partial driving ban after days of near-record pollution. Congestion in Paris went down 60 percent and the smog from the pollution cleared up enough that they rescind the ban. Some people would complain that having little to no cars will be an issue for jobs, delivery companies, or getting children to and from places. There's always a bus, and there's always the option of car pooling! Bogota, Columbia is another town that has done a car free day, except Bogota's is annual. These Columbians hiked, biked, skated or took buses to places during the car-free day, according to Source 3. Businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza says, "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution." As a result of this annual car-free day, 118 miles of bicycle paths have been constructed in Bogota. I think more towns should ban cars for just a few days. We could all get a little excersize, help the environment, and improve our mood and lower stress! A recent study found that driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009, Source 4 says. The number of miles driven in the US was at it's height in 2005 and dropped steadily after. In April 2013, the number of miles driven per person was almost 9 percent below that peak! Some sociologists believe that if this pattern continues, it will have lots of beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment, according to Source 4. Some places, such as New York, have car-sharing programs and bike-sharing programs, which is a nice way to get from place to place that's healthy for you and your environment. There's so many reasons why we should use our cars less! Like I explained, it's very healthy for your environment, and if you choose to walk or bike, its healthy for your body, too. Also, pollution rates would go down quite a lot if we would just carpool or walk/bike to places! People have said that they feel so much happier and stress free from not using a car all the time. So why not take the time to help your environment and call somebody up to carpool, get that bike fixed, or hop on that bus!                    

34

d0178e8

The new software that was developed could potentially be a benefit to society one day. Using this software might allow current researchers to determine the emotion of a person from many years ago. Although these may be the claims, this technology isn't proven to be efficient with the results it gives. Using this new technology would not be valuable to students in a classroom. The calculation the computer can make may not be factual enough to prove it's calculations are correct. In paragraph five, Dr. Huang is said to have incripted the same studies that Leonardo da Vinci used for his own anatomy studies, into the computer software. Even though this may be the case, the software used may alter the specific details in it's own study because an electronic device is determining a human situation. Although using the software may not be factual, this software also has the benefit of increasing a students emotion. As said in paragraph six, the software could determine a students emotion and display an ad of some sort to alter their mood for the better. "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored," said Dr. Huang. If these claims are proven to be true, then a students energy and mood could be altered when needed. To determine an emotion of another through a computer software, still does not give perfect results. These results may also not be trust worthy because human error is still involved due to the fact that humans developed the software itself. However, if the program can alter a students emotion in a classroom then the student may benefit greatly from it. Even though the software may not yet be perfect, it may change the perspective of a student and their attitude in a classroom.

23

dbd6b54

Imagine a world where we didn't have to drive ourselves anywhere. All we had to do is tell the car where to go and it would take us there with little or no worries. Would that be a world you would like to live in? The idea of the so called "driverless car" would not be the greatest thing in the world because even though people have tested it and still are testing it and saying there would be little or no accidents is still a risk to take. Even so the car are not completely driverless you still have to have hands on the wheel and be ready to take over if there was to be some sort of accident or back up. Even if the driverless car were to come to the world there would have to be a whole set of new problems, laws and safety needs to bring our way. It is said that "the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times". So to have a computer driving you somewhere would increase the chance of being at risk of an accident. So the idea of the "driverless car" wouldn't be the best thing for the world because it would be too much of a risk, they still have many flaws that people have to mess with and simply the peson in the driver's seat is the best man for the job.

23

62b94ff

Ever since their creation, cars have been the main method of transportation. However, in recent times cars have become less popular because of the issues that they cause. Limited car use would be very advantageous because vehicles discourage physical activity, make pollution, and cost everyone money. An advantage of limiting the use of cars is that they discourage physical activity. Reliance on a motorized vehicle for transportation from place to place results in little to no physical activity. Cars have replaced the use of bicycles, skateboards, and regular walking, their use seemingly reserved only for the youth. In a car free society such as Vaunban, Germany, the "swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children" can be heard by anyone walking down the street (Source 1). This clearly shows that when cars are used less,  people engage in more physical activity. This is the same case for Bogota, Columbia where the Day Without Cars is a big hit. Just in the third year of this event, over 118 miles of bicycle paths have been contructed in the city (Source 3). Limiting the use of cars is definetely advantageous because they discourage physical acticity. Limiting the use of cars would be incredibly beneficial because they make polluation. The billions of vehicles in the world create unbelievable amounts of pollution. In Europe, "passenger cars are respondible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions" and "up to 50 percent... in the United States" (Source 1). The pollution from the increasing amounts of cars in compacted areas "are chocking cities" (Source 1). Nearly nothing else creates that much pollution. The only thing that cars are second to in the polluation rates are the monstrous power plants that continuously belch smoke into the atmosphere (Source 4). If the use of vehicles decreases, then "it will have beneficial impliciarions for carbon emissions and the environment" (Source 4). This evidence clearly supports that the use of vehicles is causing a huge amount of pollution. Thus, limiting the use of cars would be incredibly beneficial because they make pollution. Decreased use of automobiles would be extremely advantageous because the they cost everyone money. Expenses such as constant maintanance and fuel cost the average car owner a large chunk of their salary. In April 2013, the average miles driven per person was down by 9 percent, equivalent to the rate in January 1995 (Source 4). The most likely cause is that "cash-strapped Americans could not afford new cars" (Source 4). The high cost of cars and their maintanace is a huge burden on the backs of the average vehicle owner. Not only does vehicles cost the individual person, but they have large effects on the government. In the six-year federal transportation bill, the cost of the highways was 80 percent, and only 20 percent was available to all other forms of transportation (Source 1). This issue has caused the legislators to get involved with the problem. Obviously, decreasing the amount of automobiles would be extremely advantageous because they cost everyone money. Limited car use would be very advantageous because vehicles discourage physical activity, make pollution, and cost everyone money.

45

bee6b7f

Dear ,Mr. senator I'm writting this letter to you in the favor of not keeping the electoral college . It take the right of the people away ,we dont get to choose who we want as president because if we dont get a say then the congress chooses for us and that might just create some dissagrements between the peopleand the goverment . In the text it states that the voters don't control who they elect for that kinds of violate our rights as the voters .The text also states that the systems allow for much worse to happen than what happened in 2000 the legeslators are respionsible gfor it and it said that those elctors can also defi the the rights of our people in that case it will all be thronw to the house of representative the electoral college is unfair and irrational althought one might say thast it keeps us from getting to much chaos it actually does'nt becasuse if the people think that your taking there rights aways them wil go against you like nobodies bussiness. Thank you for your time, PROPER_NAME

12

266b6fb

I was a Seagoing Cowboy. I help feed the horses that are getting tranported to Europe. I remember that one time I tried to convince some other people to join the program. It didn't go so well. "I don't like the sea air", "I hate the ocean", " I can't swim", "What we get tropedoed? I can't swim", I have allergies to horses". These are exuses I get when I try to convince other people to join the progam I am in. I did convince some, but not a lot. Most think that I am a creep. They try to get away from me. I am always sad when I see them walk away, but at least I tried. Eventuly I gave up trying to convince them. So here I am, on the sea, thinking about the people that I tried to get them to join. Every time that I thought about them, I think about what they are doing right now. When I was discharged, I went off to find every single one of the people and tell about my journys. They always say the same thing. "I wish I joined the program." Then we have a good talk about what they did while I was overseas. I feel like that I have more friends than I used to before.

01

98bbdf1

The electoral college is an institution that has always guided  the presidential elections. The electoral college is tradition and shouldn't be changed because it has balanced relegation of power within the states, there is almost always a definate winner, and it is able to hold a set timeline for the elections. The college has always been able to choose a president that is able to lead our country well, the electoral college is a representation of the people of the United States of America. As the president's constituents, we have the power to choose our leader, and they make it a little easier for us. The electoral college takes into account the populations of each state within its calculations. This is why Wyoming has only three votes and Florida has twenty nine. It's nothing to complain about, because it's the same number of people each state has in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, meaning each state has at least three votes, decided by its population. This is not a very bad system because the states with huge populations have a bit of their power curbed by the number of electors. So if Wyoming increases its population, and Florida has its population decreased, one of the electors could be removed from Florida and added to Wyoming, balancing the scale of power between them. It's only fair for a populous state like Florida to have more electors anyway, there are many opinions that are yearning to be heard within the ginormous population, and there must be enough electors who can take it upon themselves to voice them. The Electoral College protects us from the probability of voting just because the candidate is from the same state. A majority of people will vote because of a close association with a candidate if the electoral college is abolished. This is why the electoral college only contains 538 people, because nobody wants millions of voters in California voting for the same candidate just because they are the Governor of California. Due to the even amount of votes in the electoral college, there is a slight chance of a tie. However, with all but two states being part of the "winner-take-all" system, the chance of that happening are astronomically low. This is why swing states are so important to the canditates, they know that the chances of them winning the votes in the other party's states are almost impossible, so they must gather all of the votes they can from the states that are known for their swing-like tendencies. It also goes the other way, each candidate trusts that their own party's states will vote for them, so there is no need to waste the money and campaign. Unless its the primary elections, candidates don't typically campaign where they know that the votes are all but set in stone. It's like going grocery shopping, if you know that you are allergic to peanut butter and you already have all the jam you need, you will only go for the special bread that everybody fights for right? The candidates are the same, they don't go after what they already have and what they can't have, only what they might earn, or else it's just a waste of money, so nobody should be able to complain about a candidates campaigning. A president has always been inaugrated on either January 20th or March 4th, to change that would be blasphemous to both the people and to the United States of America. So it is imperitive that the decision is made early, so that tradition and will not be broken. Contrary to popular belief, there is a set timeline that the election process goes through, and without the electoral college, it is highly possible and probable that the timeline will be broken. The election process is guided by this timeline, for example, voting starts on the second Thursday of the month of November every single time. The Electoral College is a huge part of this process also, and to destroy that would be heartbreaking for the nuerotics that can't stand any change in routine. If the Electoral College were to be abolished, and popular vote was to be instigated throughout the country, any semblance of a schedule would be torn away. Problems would spring up all over the place, and everything would all go to hell. Instead of recounts for counties, whole states would need recounts. If a populous state like Texas were to need a recount, never mind a week, a month wouldn't be enough time to recount it all perfectly. The government would be stuck without a leader, and worst case scenario, the United States of America could be put in a state of anarchy by the end of the decade. Then, we wouldn't be United anymore. The Electoral College has been there from the beginning, and the without it the United States of America could be thrown into chaos. Traditions shouldn't be broken and the Electoral College represents the biggest one of them all, it balances power between each of the states, defines a true winner, and guides the U.S. on a set timeline. It wouldn't be a far stretch to say that the Electoral College helps keep the order of the country. Truthfully, everyone needs some semblance of order, and the Electoral College provides that and more.

45

02d8dd2

The use of cars today in our modern world is crazy! Everywhere you look there's cars; going down the road, parked in a garage, or on TV. Now think of a world without them...it would be different, wouldnt it? Yes, indeed it would be, the world would be less hectic and cleaner place to live. First, Life without cars would make life much less hectic. In Vaunban,Germany there is an upscale community where there are no cars. People either walk, ride bikes or take the public tram. A servey shows "70 precent of Vanuban's families do not own cars, and 57 precent sold a car to move here". People move to Vauban to enjoy a "car-free"...stress free life. "Im much happier this way" said Heidrun Walter, a media trainer and mother of two, as she walked verdant streets where the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drown out the occasional distant motor." (sorce 1 paragrah 3) The "car-free" world of not having to worry about car payemrnt, incerance, and gas money is a whole lot better than a car dependent world. Second, Limiting our car use would help make this planet cleaner. Pollution issues have gotten so bad that "...Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city". (Source 2 paragraph 10) In paragraph 14 it states that "after five-days of intensive smog...the smog rivaled Beijing,China, which is one one of the most polluted cities in the world". France uses more diesel than gasoline, therefore making up 67 precent of all vehicles in France. The use of these harsh fossil feuls is a huge problem that can help be controlled by limiting our use of automobiles. Third, Although some may argue that we need cars to fuction in our modern world, there are other options that we can choose. For example, If everyone took public transportation such as the subway we would be cutting back tremenously on the amout of feul consumed. Another advantage of using other forms of transportation other than a car would be that you wouldnt have to worry about your car not starting, or not having enough money too fill your tank. Other forms of transportation would always be reliable and convenent. You would also feel good about helping the enviornment by not adding extra gases to the ozone. To finish up, Limiting our use of cars would make life easier and cleaner. In source 3 it states "Its 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. Many people are convinved that a "car-free" life would be much nicer than the hectic car-consumed life we've all grown so accustom too. Limiting our use of cars is a good idea for our stressful lives.

34

452c84b

Every living thing on planet earth has emotions. These emotions have been used since the beginning of time to express the feelings of the people around you. However, these emotions can be decieving. Someone could say they are happy, when really they are angry or upset. This is where the Facial Action Coding System comes into play. The FACS is a software that detects human emotion by tracking muscles in the face. For example, when you are happy, muscles in your face move up, and when you are sad, they move down, FACS tracks this and calculates your emotions. The creators of this software, Prof. Thomas Huang and Prof. Nicu Sebe are the leading experts of developing better ways for humans and computers to communicate. There are still some questions surrounding the usefulness of FACS, like what could this software actually be used for? One of the ways FACS may be used is in classrooms. It may sound far fetched, but actually, FACS may be the best thing to come to schools because of its flexible learning and the ability to read the students. In the education world, teachers are the backbone of the infestructure. Without teachers, the whole system would collapse. However, it may be hard for one teacher to connect with every student individually and make sure they are learning properly or if they are paying attention. This is where FACS comes in. In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile", Dr. Huang talks about FACS in classrooms more in depth, "'A classroom computer could recgonize when a student is becoming confused or bored,' Dr. Huang predicts. 'Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human istructor.'" With FACS, every child could essentially have a customized lesson plan exactly for their needs. This would make children more eager to learn because they begin to enjoy it. Besides the classroom, FACS could also be used in the school elsewhere. One of the other important areas this could be used is in counceling. It is very hard for anyone to tell someone they are sad. This is especally true when they barely know the person they are talking to. This can be the case for school councelors and the children they are meeting with. FACS may be able to help. With FACS, the school could see if children are upset or scared. The school could also see how often these children feel this way. When a child is unhappy or scared, it is very unlikely that they are going to be doing their work at full capacity. If FACS could find these children that need help, they could be helped faster. This could also be used to find children being bullied. If the child is feeling scared around another student, or if a child is afraid of a classroom, they could be helped because FACS was able to read them. FACS may even be able to detect if a child is afraid of leaving school. With FACS, it's like every child in school has someone that is looking out for them, even if no one else is. It may be true that some children might not want people to know about this, that they may want to hide it. However, it is never healthy to hide such strong emotions, especally if there are people around you willing to help. With the constant evoultion of the way we learn, its not suprising that something like FACS was created. Emotions have been with everything living since the beginning of time. Before FACS, it was suprisingly difficult to read these emotions in people. Such a crucial part of our everyday lives could be easily hidden away by a fake smile or a theatre tear. But now that there is FACS helping out, looks are no longer decieving.

45

6e4237e

Dear, State senator I am righting to you today about about a very important topic, I am here to tell you that I believe we should change from Electoral College to election by popular vote for the president of the United States. There are many reasons why we should do this transaction. First reason, why we should change to election by popular vote is because Electoral College is very unfair to the the people running for presdient, and the people voting. Its unfair mostley because of the winner-take-all system in each state. This system is ridicolus because a lot of candidates don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states. I know a lot of crazy systems like this are making people not want to vote anymore, which is not good. Another great reason, why we should change from the Electoral College to election by popular vote is because of how out of date and irrational the Electoral College actually is. Us the people of the United States don't even get to vote for our next president directly, you help choose your state's electors when you vote for president because when you vote for your candidate you are actually voting for your candidate's electors. The last reason, why we should change over to election by popular vote is because of the prospect of a tie in the electoral vote. The way the Electoral College handles ties is unprofessional to many, becasue all they do is throw the election to the House of Representatives, where state delegations vote on the president. The single representative from Wyoming, representing 500,000 voters, would have as much say as the 55 representatives from California, who represent 35 million voters. In Conclusion, As you can see Mr. Senator Me and many others would really enjoy if the Electoral College was changed to election by popular vote. The reason being is because of how the Electoral College is unfair and irrational. Sincerley, PROPER_NAME               

23

e90d60c

Particapate in the Seagoing Cowboys program! Would you like to visit diffrent countries? People should particapate int he Seagoing Cowboys program because you will be able to help many diffrent kind of animals like horses and cows. In the text the author states that that '' more than forty four nations jioned together to form an UNRRA. The author also states that many contries were in ruins. So that shows that if you particapate you will be helping the contries thta are in ruins. One reason why you should particapate in the Seagoing Cowboys program is because you will be helping out people in need. you willl also help with the food supplies. You will get to have the oppertunitie to see new things and do new things. It will be a fun trip also you will be doing a good thing also . Thirdly you will learn new things like how to take care of animals. Another thing that is a good bennifit if you join the Seagoing Cowboys program is that you will go to many diffrent places like China ,and Greece. You will get to go on tours like an excavated castlein crete and marveled at the Panama Canal . You willl get to see many diffrent cultures from many difrent countries. Finnaly you wont have to contantly do claening and taking care of animals , you can do mant things like read play games , boxing, and table - tennis tournaments. One bennifit personally for yourself is that you will alwats have that good feeling that you helped many diffrent animals, people , and contries from World War ll. More than fort four state3s joined together to help other countries so that shows thta you should particapate in the Seagoing Cowboys

23

ece34cd

I think you should join the program and become a seagoing cowboy because you get to go to unique places and do easy and hard work. When you work for the seagoing cowboys you have a funtime. You also get to play sports like volleyball and soccer. I think you should go and become a seagoing cowboy becuse of a article I "read called A Cowboy Who Rode the Waves ". Some details that show to help support for this article are,that on line 5 it sates "The cattle-boat trips were an unbelieveable oppurtunity for a small town boy" he says. "Besides helping people I had the the side of the benefit of seeing Europe and China but seeing the Acropolis was special. this part of the text gives evidence to show that you get to go to unique places. This text also states that it took about two weeks to cross the Atlantic ocean from the Eastern coast of the United States, and a month to get to the China. Carring for the animals during the crossings kept Luke busy they had to be fed and watered two or three times a day. This shows evidenece to support that some parts of the job keeps you busy, and makes the work hard too. Heres my last text evidence to show you why you should become a seagoing cowboy and this part of the text hel[ps understand how it could be casy and have freetime during work. " Luke also found time to have fun on board, espicially on return trips after the animals had been unloaded. The cowboys played baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed. Table tenis tounerments,fencing,boxing,reading,whitiling an games helped pass time. This is why I think you should be a seagoing cowboy too.

23

a397eb1

The Electoral College vote is a somewhat a confusing process with the voter not voting for the president, but electors who elect the president. Many people think that this method is flawed becuase the people are not electing the president. On the hand people think that the Electoral vote keeps the race for presidency with a more clear outcome, than if they were elected by the popular vote. There are defiently two different arguments to this points with both sides involving good evidence. There are many flaws that people bring up in regard to the electoral vote. One of these is that since the state legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors, the electors could easily defy the will of the people. The most obvious fact about the electoral vote is that you are not voting for the president, but for a group of electors who then vote for the president. This is also unfair to voters because the candidates don't spend time in states they know will not win. During the 2000 campaign, seventeen states did not even see the candidates, and people in 25 of the largest media markets didn't see a single campaign ad. In turn the elctoral college is unfair and outdated. Though there are plently of things wrong with the electoral college there are still plently of good arguments as to why we should keep it.  With the electoral college vote there is less of a chance of a dispute over the outcome thaan with the popular vote, though it happened in the 2000 election. The electoral can also make the race more fair, because a candidate with more regional appeal can not gain more electoral votes by campaigning heavily in that area. The electoral college also can help avoid run-off elections like Nixon in 1968 and Clinton in 1992. Overally the Electoral College vote is a way of electing a president without actually electing a president, that should probabley be removed so the people have more of a say on who runs there country.            

23

c602ff9

Dear Senator I am writing this letter to you to tell why i think we should change from Electoral College to election by popular vote. See the thing is Senator the Electoral College seems like a biais to me, its unfair to the people. Many Americans dont vote because they fair that that votes won't go to the right person because in truth and in facts when the American people vote they're not voting for who's to become president they vote for the electors and not knowing that the electors dont always vote for the same person the voted for so all Americans are doing is meaningless voting because they dont really have a choice they may think they voting for Obama and the electors voted for Romney. And thats why most Americans dont vote. I feel it wouuld be best if all voting is done by popular vote , because either way all of the American people dont get a say in the voting rules but at least they know that there not being cheated. Because when they vote by electoral college most states dont even get the chance to vote because its small or under populated , which is unfair not because you know a state is small and it might not make a difference doesn't means they dont have the right to vote its totally unfair.  

12

c486ab6

Some people don't like the electoral college, whie some people do. The electoral college is a process, the founding fathers established in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President byh a vote in congress and election of presidentts but popular vote. The process is the selection of electors, the meeting with the presideng and vice, and the counting of the electoral votes. The Electoral college is unfair and practical, while the election of the popular vote should get the president due to the swing states. They should favor in changing to the election by popular votes got the president the of the United States. They should favor in changing the election by popular vote since the electoral college is unfair. It is unfair because is regraded as a non-demcratic method of selecting a president. It should be overulled by declaring the candidate that recieves the most popular votes. For example, Obama recieved 61.7 percent of popular votes compared to 51.3 percent of popular votes for him and Romney. It is possible that the winner of electoral will not win due to the national popular vote. The should favor in changing th election by popular vote since the electoral college is practical. It is practical because they avoid problems in the election. The arguments in favor mostly assertions without much basis in reality and the arguments against direct elections are spurious at best. Also, the electoral college avoids the problem in election. They avoid the problems in the election which no candidate recieves a majoriy of the votes cast. For example, Nixion and Clinton both had 43 percent plurality of popular votes. There is pressure for run-off elections when no candidate wins a majority vote, that pressure greatly complicates the presidential process. They should favor in changing the election by popular votes since there are swing states. In swing states there are thoughtful votes. the winner take all method of awarding electoral votes induces the candidates to focus their campaign efforts on the toss up states. They mostly focus on the swing states. The toss up states pay more attention to the campaign, realling listening to the competing candidates. The electoral college is unfair to votes because the winner take all system in each state, all candidates dont spend much time in states knowing they will not have a chance at winning. ( Richard A. Posner, 3) Swing states line 20) In conclusion, they should favor in changing to the election by popular votes got the president the of the United States because the Electoral college is unfair and practical, while the election of the popular vote should get the president due to the swing states.    

23

f3fbc5b

Dear state senator, I beleive that we should throw out the electoral colledge and not use it anymore. Today it is irrelevant and it does not help out the elections, in fact I think it only causes trouble. The electoral colledge is the last deciding factor of who acuatlly gets president. How is that a democracy? The people vote for who they want to in the main election and then by popular vote is usually what party gets to send the electors that would vote for them(source 1 ph 5-8). An example of this is the famous 2000 election. That election Al Gore and George Busch were facing off fo the right to hold office. Now Al Gore had won by popular vote, but instead what happened is the electoral colledge voted in favor of Busch instead of Al Gore(posner  ph16). So this shows that Gore should have won because he had the most votes by the american people, but then the electoral colledge voted someone else. So why did the people even vote if the person they wanted in office did not even make it in. That is why we should do away with the electoral colledge. Now if for some reason the majority voted in a really crazy man into office that would completely corupt the government then it would be good too have something else that can change teh vote so that America does not get anymore corrupted. The only problem is how many times would you vote for a crazy person who you know will affect you in a very major way? My guess is not very often. Now there is some perks but they are really only for the losing president. If the pesident did not win all of the popular vote he could have won a lot more swing states than his opponent which help him better in the electoral election(posner ph20). So there is only one way that the electoral colledge is helpful and it is not even to the American voters. This is why we need a change and to get rid of the electoral colledge. So in conclusion, I have shared many reasons why the electoral colledge needs to go. I hope that you mull over these ideas and that you bring them to the governments attention. Sincerely, A student

23

00d027f

Imagine a system that can actually help you stay focused and determined with your learning. No more kids dozing off because of boredom, or becoming uninterested with a subject. This advancment in computer software that can recognize human emotions and change the way we learn for the better . Now take the software mentioned into a class room where it can make "calculations" about human emotion just as any other human does. The author, Nick D'Alto, says this "if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow." he also quotes a Dr. Huang saying "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming bored or confused or bored." Take these two quotes and you imagine a super computer that can learn what you take interest in and modify it's self to your liking. This would allow students to take charge in how they learn a concept. This could be the next big things in learning since computers were first introduced in a classroom. That's not even the limit. This technology could be implimented in home schooled children and online classes as well. The reason being as Dr. Huang puts it "it could modify the lesson...like and effective human instructor." This means it would have the power to change lessons if you were not following or just confused. This ability can amplify the process of students learning online or at home. In coclussion the technology being able to recognize human emotions will only improve the educational system. Being able to tell if a student is bored or confused on a concept will help improve many aspects in schooling. Being able to modify lessons on the spot just like a human insturctor is valuable.

23

9c1a3b2

I have ever wanted a care where you could just sit back and not even drive ? Do you think it would be fun , dangerous ? I think it would be unecessary and uncalled for , very dangerous . In my opinion about driveless cars , I do not agree that they should even be used or made . We are just doing fine with the cars In our generation now , I highly suggest if we all keep jobs , and make enough money to pay for gas , fuel and other needed things for our car we would be just fine . Some reasons why I disagree with driveless cars , is because why have one , if most of the time your worrying when theres going to be accidents or road work , this encourages you to get in an accident more easliy .It also makes human beings more lazy as it is , this is going to get out of hand when they try to start making everthing do stuff by itself , so they wont have to work or do anyrhing to get it to work. As it is explaining in paragraph 7 , how dangerous a driveless car can be , and all the things that could go wrong , having one of them. In this story its explaing the fun parts and then the bad parts, but I honestyly can say , we dont need them I think we are doing fine with the regualr cars we have right now. Whats the point have having a driveless car without the driver , whats the driver supposed to do when the car gets out of control and starts acting out , he or she will not know what to do next . As I was saying which one would you pick ? What you put driveless cars on your dangerous category ? Think real hard about this , Would you let your teenager have this , for fun or just to impress .

23

d4d2647

Facial Action Coding System enables computers to identify human emotions, the use of this technology to read the expressions of students in a classroom is valuable. Schools are already incooperating technology into schools so much more these days. If were going to be doing more online learning it should at least be taught as a real person would teach it. "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored.... then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor" this could help alot with online learning especially if your doing work at home and dont have a teach there present with you to further explain something. "most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication... So computers need to understand that too" Technology is becoming a part of our lives more and more everyday. We see it eeverywhere we go now. Most people probably interact more with devices than with an actual human being. So why not make it easier for people to learn online with the use of Facial Action Coding System's We should incooperate face analysis devices into a schools to make it easier for students to learn online.

23

aa8b0c1

I think that when picking the president that the people of the united states should be the ones to pick instead the electoral college makes the choices of who we get for president. When you vote along with everyong else i think that the majority of the votes should get that presedent instead of everyone voteing and then it getting sent to the electoral college and them getting to pick who they want wich i dont think is right i think that the people should pick who they want by the votes. The one with the most popular vote should win. When you vote for a presidential candidate you are actually voting for slate of electors. The electoral college consist of 538 electors and a majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the president. If you where running for president and you didnt have as many votes from the people as the ofter guy you can still win the election cause of the electoral college is the one that makes the decision to who we have as the president. each party selects a slate of electors trusted to vote for the party's nominee. It is entirely possible that the winner of the electoral vote will not wing the national popular vote. This is a very rare thing to happen it has only ever happen twice it happen in 2000 and 1888. People think that they should abolish the electoral college because they think it is not right that they get to vote for who actually becomes president they think it should be the citizens right to pick who we want as president rather than letting the electoral college vote for us for president. In columbia they are allocated 3 electors and treated like a state for purposes of the electoral college. In conclusion i think that it is not right that the electoral college gets to pick are president for us but i think that we should be able to pick are president by popular vote instead of haveing that electoral college.  

12

e52f321

Venus is a very pretty panet-that looks like a star from Earth-that lights up the night sky. Even though it is often referred to as Earth's "twin," Venus has proven itself to be dangerous to explore, but very worth it. Despite its proximity to us, obsurd heat and pressure condidtions, spacecraft landing failures, and high levels of corrosive sulfuric acid make studying Venus very challenging. Although it is very dangerous to enter these extreame conditions, NASA (The National Aeronautics and Space Administration) has came up with a theory to avoid Venus's 800 degree Fahrenheit temperatures. They suggest that Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray-only reaching 170 degrees Fahrenheit-about 30 or so miles above the landscape. This would make the air pressure close to that of sea level on Earth. Still, these would not be ideal conditions, but survivable for those with deisre. Another fear of scientists is spacecraft failures. Humans have sent multiple spacecrafts to land on Venus-each unmanned-but have all failed within a couple hours of landing. Although those previous missions have toutched down on Venus, none have made contact in three decades. This is very discouraging for scientists, but also motivating in some aspects. The most crutial danger of landing on Venus is the insanely high levels of corrosive sulfuric acid. These clouds make it impossible to survive through Venus's atmosphere. This atmosphere contains almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets coating the planet. This makes it unreaistic to have human life on Venus. The insane pressure and heat, spacecraft fails, and sulfuric acid in the atmosphere make studying Venus very challenging for scientists. Scientists believe that dangers and doubt should not limit the edges of immagination and innovation so, they are striving to meet Venus and its challenges.

23

a2ffd16

The Face on Mars wasn't created by "aliens", it's was Martian mesa. The Martian mesa was located around Cydonia, just this one has unusual shadows. Many conspiracy theorists think that the face is bona fide evidence of life on Mars, and that's why NASA would rather hide it from the public. People says that NASA is hiding it, even though a few days later they unveiled the image for everyone to see. Plus, it's been in books, magazines, radio talk shows, it even starred in a Hollywood film, think about that! Some scientist believed that the Face was an alien artifact, eventhough it's not. The image first appeared on a JPL website revealing that it is indeed . . . a natural landform. Not a lot was satisfied at this. On the board MGS had to peer through clouds just to see the Face; which made some people say "Perhaps alien markings were hidden by haze." So what did the MGS do, then went back to check it out. It was not an easy trip, but when they went back to take another photo they noticed something extraordinary. What the team saw was a Martian Mesa or butte-which are landforms around the American West. They noticed that 1976 Viking photo can span 43 meters per pixel, but in the 2001 image can span over 1.5 meters. So if there were objects in this picture you would have seen them more clearly in the 2001 photo then in the 1976 Viking photo.

12

54a0093

Wouldn't it be cool to be able to relax while driving? Personally, as a driver myself, I do know that driving for long periods of time can be very tiring. Your feet get tired and your legs become ressless. If you were able to just sit back and relax while the car was being driven, and you only had to be attentive when a problem occured, is that an experience that you would want to partake in? I believe that driverless cars could be very convienent for drivers, and I think that they should be put to use. They would become very popular because as it says in paragraph two, "Television and movies have long been fascinated with cars that could drive themselves.". Many people would want to own one for themselves, and be able to get the experience. Everyone would know about it because the media would make it be very well known, and the companies that would be selling the driverless cars would make lots of profit. Many people might say that it is dangerous and could cause a tragic car accident, but in paragraph seven it states " In fact, none of the cars developed so far are completley driverless. They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navagating through work zones and around accidents." With this being said, drivers must be attentive and remain alert and be ready to take over when a problem like this was to accur. Another point that may be brought up in discussion is what if the driver's attention is not able to be grabbed when the car is in need of the driver's assistance? Well, in paragraph seven, it says that "GM has devleoped driver's seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger of backing into an object. The Google car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over. Other options under concideration are flashing lights on the windshield and other heads-up displays.". These are all things that could be put in place to ensure that the car is able to quickly get the driver's attention. Peronsally, I believe that the driverless car would be a great help to every person driving. They would be able to relax more, and they would not have to take so manys stop breaks between round trips . The driver could simply be more at ease while driving, and not have to be so cautious. The driverless car would be more safe for people inside the car, and outside the car such as pedestrians. The driverless car is a great idea.

34

d24d888

Venus, sometimes is called "Evening Star", most people say that Venus is like a 2nd Earth. It was able to support life forms, like animals. Plus it's the closest in distance. People wasn't able to go on Venus because it's so dangerous. Some people haven't tried going there for three decades. But NASA,has a particularly compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. NASA's way is to allow people to float above the fray of Venus to avoid the conditions said planet, like our jet airplanes. Plus at thirty-plus miles above the surface. temperatures would still be toasty around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. NASA is working on a way to approaches of studying Venus. So, in conclusion, Venus can be explored if your above the fray of it. So NASA is gonna keep making sure that people can explore Venus without having to deal with it's Not so easy conditions.

01

28645f2

Cars have been popular and widely used ever since they were invented. They offer a fast and efficient form of transportation across both long and short distances. In this aspect, cars may appear extremely beneficiary and useful in everyday life, but there are always downsides to great inventions, especially the invention of the car. More and more people from all around the world are realizing the harms that car usage brings and are beginning to abandon their cars altogether. The most apparent reason as to why cars are damaging is because of the great amount of greenhouses gases they emit into the atmosphere. They also bring about pollution and smog with them. Finally, and maybe surprisingly to some, people are actually happier without these pollution monsters. To start, cars expel shocking amounts of greenhouses gases from their tailpipes. By limiting usage of these automobiles, the amount of green house gases can be significantly reduced. According to the source, In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars, cars produce up to 12 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions in places like Europe, but an eyepopping 50 percent in the United States where there is heavy car usage. This is a lot of noxious gas that is being put into the atmosphere, and poses a serious harm to the people living in these cities. Greenhouse gases are an especially maleficient form of pollution because greenhouse gases tend to trap heat and other types of pollution from escaping the atmosphere, leaving filth in the air that are then absorbed by the lungs, "choking cities (Rosenthal 8)." This is without a doubt a serious problem, but it can be corrected simply by not driving as frequently. According to The End of Car Culture, "But America's love affair with it vehicles seems to be cooling...If the pattern persists-and many sociologists believe it will-it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment, since transportation is the second largest source of America's emissions, just behind power plants (Rosenthal 32-34)." Simply by reducing car usage, these harmful toxins can be removed from the atmosphere. Pollution is another quite obvious reason to why restricting car usage is benefical. Cars release other toxins and gases as well that contribute greatly to pollution and smog. Paris bans driving due to smog tells the story of how driving had to be banned for days because of the worst pollution the city has ever seen. According to this passage, "Congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog...[Last] week Paris had 147 micrograms of particulate matter (PM) per cubic meter compared with 144 in Brussels and 79.7 in London, Reuters found (Duffer 14-17)." This is a ton of particulate matter that will be all breathed in by the people there if they are not removed. Paris, Brussels, and London are not only the cities plagued by this pollution from cars as "[The smog] rivaled Beijing, China, which is known as one of the most polluted cities in the world (Duffer 14)." Smog from pollution negatively effects many aspects of life, but the worst was that "Cold nights and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emissions (Duffer 14)." This phenomenon forces the people to breathe these particles into their lungs. Pollution is a terrible occurence that tags along with car usage, but by simply banning cars with even-numbered licnese plates off the road for one day, the smog greatly lightened in severity, enough for the city of Paris to lift the ban. No one wants pollution in their city, and simply by cutting back on car usage, pollution can be greatly reduced for the benefit of the people. Finally, and most surprisingly, people are actually happier and less stressed without these modern horses. Heidrum Walter, a mother who lives in the city of Vauban Germany, a community devoid of cars, says in the passage, Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars , "'When I had a car I was tense. I'm much happier this way (Rosenthal 3).'" Carlos Arturo Plaza, a man in Bogota, Colombia, also commented during Bogota's Day Without Cars, (in the source, Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota ) "'It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution (Selsky 24).'" This may seen a little puzzling at first as to why people would not enjoy fast and convenient transportation, but then the answer becomes pretty obvious. Without cars, parks, sport centers, and other outdoor recreational places have started to pop up more amd more on the streets of cities once bustling with cars. The roads are much less congested and new shops and food centers have appeared as well. Limiting cars pleases people in many different aspects of their life. Cars may appear to be helpful at times, but in reality, citizens are better off without these transportation machines. Not only do they greatly pollute the air and cause smog, they also spew out noxious greenhouse gases that cause more damage to the society as a whole. Finally, and probably most importantly, the citizens themselves enjoy life better when these cars are out of them. Although this doesn't mean cars should stop being manufactored altogether, people should think twice before jumping in their car next time.

45

92cf776

Driverless cars would be useful and should continue to be developed because they would be potentially safer, more efficient, and help drivers by making driving a less intensive and dangerous activity. Driverless cars would be safer then current cars. One way this woud be true is because many driverless (and current with-driver cars) have features that allow them to sense danger in traffic. For example, as stated in paragraph 7, it is shown that BMW is developing a car that can steer, accelerate, and brake. Even though the cars are not completely driverless, further development of the cars could possibly fix these issues. Driverless cars may also be able to find each other via GPS to avoid collisions. Driverless cars could be possibly more efficient than current cars. For example, a driverless car with a GPS could possibly find the quickest and most fuel-efficient route to a destination. Another thing driverless cars may be able to do more efficiently is determine the best way to save gas or prevent wear and tear to the car on a case by case basis. For example, a car with a smart computer may be able to decide whether it is more fuel efficient to turn off the engine or leave it running, depending on the amount of time it will be left idle. To combat wear and tear, a driverless car may be able to accurately determine the best distance and amount of time to brake to keep the damage to tires and brakes as low as possible. Driverless cars could make driving less dangerous and intensive for drivers. Currently, drivers must keep their eyes on the road and have full awareness of everything going on around them to drive safely. A driverless car with safety features similar to the ones described in paragraphs 7 and 8 would allow the driver to not worry as much about what is going on around them. This may allow them to do other work or concentrate on something else, like children in the car. Driverless cars would generally be a good thing to continue researching and developing, as they would make driving safer, more efficient, and less intensive for drivers.

34

1cf90a1

Using Facial Action Coding System will make changes around the world. Predicting what anothers person emotion towards you or somene else is very important to communicate, otherwise there will be confusion. Setting up this new system of facial recongnition would be a huge step through technology as we know it. This sysem alllows computers or other devies to be more safisticated and secure for their user or owner. Why just use your face as the password when you can use any emmotion your feeling. It wont just aids adults it will also aid underage teens or elementary kids. As for an example in the text it of Making Mona Lisa Smile that "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored ,"Dr.Huang predicts."Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor."The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive-for video games or video sugery." Most human communication is nonverbal,including emotional communication."notes Dr.Huang."SO computers need to undersant that too. This is saying that kids and gaming companies will also benefit for them. In the Facial Action Coding System it predicts emotion and a big one is hate and to second we have lies. In the text Making Mona Lisa Smile. " it states that " In a false smile , the mouth is stretched sideways using the zygomatic major and a difrrent muscle, the risouris.To an expert,faces dont lie;thses muscles clues are sometimes used to spot when a smiling pollitcian or celebrity isnt being truthful." All this shows is how corrupted the govermnet really is. In conclusion, Using the Facial Action Coding System it is the for most advanced piece of technology that will secure and protect your money, idntity and most importanly , life.

12

d1fd261

Saving money is one result of limiting car usage, another result is that limiting your car usage can relieve some of your stress. There are many places that do it today, like Germany, Paris, and Bogota. In the first souce "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars", it talks about how you aren't tensed up all the time anymore, one person even said "When I had a car i was always tense. I'm much happier this way". what he means by "this way" is that he is much happier that he doesn't have to worry about a car anymore. In source two, "Paris bans driving due to smog", it shows that many people are getting fined because they have an even numbered liscenes plate, the same applies to the odd numbered liscenes plates the following day. This can cause stress if you do not listen to the instruction because you woud get a fine of 22-euro, or $31. If you listen to the law, you can also save money. In conclusion, limiting car usage can relieve stress and save you money because you won't have to worry about other people crashing into you, and because you won't always have to buy gas for your vehicle.

12

4632334

Dear State Senator, The Electoral College is a system that the United States has been using to elect its leaders for many years. A large number of people have come to believe that this method of voting is fraud because not everyone's vote is truely heard. The way the Electoral College works is every four years when people go to vote, people are not actually voting directly for their desired leader, but for a state elector. Although this sounds like it would work flawlessly in theory, in some cases the number of electoral votes have overridden the number of popular votes. In the 2000 election between Bush and Gore, Bush ended up winning even though Gore received more popular votes. The nation did not know who the President was going to be until the next year becuase the election came down to only a couple of hundred votes. Although this is a rare occurance it shows how easily the Electoral College can wrongly choose a President. If the United States elected a President by taking a popular vote, this issue would not exist. All of the extra systems that are put in place are simply not needed. If the Electoral College was removed and the United States voted in leaders based on the national popular vote, this means that there would also be more people voting. Many people, especially in one sided states such as Texas and California, believe that their vote does not count becuase they're state is guarenteed to favor one party every election. If the Electoral College did not exist then knowing that every individual vote counts and that it does not matter where you live, more people are actually going to listen to what candidates have to say and are going to go out and vote. In Conclusion, although the Electoral College may sound good in theory, I believe that the United States voting system would be more legitimate if a national popular vote was taken so that everyone's voice is heard no matter where they live. Voters should be able to know that they're vote will count so that the right leader is chosen for the right reason.    

34

43d40a3

"The Face'' As we all know in the year of 1976 Nasa's Viking 1 spacecraft captured a photo which was belived to be a "face'' formed in Mar's surface. There has also been arguments over the years if "the face" was created by aliens or was it just a natural landform. Here is why I belive it is a natural landform. In the article "Umasking the Face on Mars, in paragraph 12 it says what the picture that the picture actually shows that the Martian is equaivalent to a butte or messa which are landforms common around the American West. Some migfht that you can't actually tell what things really are just from a picture because it is only a proportion. Well, in paragraph 11 Garvin says that ," As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size. "So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Eqytian -style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were. Some might say that you can tell by the picture thaat Viking 1 spacecraft took because of the type of technology they were using in the 20th century. Well in paragraph 10 they said that they rolled their spacecraft 25 degrees to center in the Face in the feild of veiw. Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camer's absolute maximum reslotion. Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters, 43 in the 1976 Viking photo. This tells everyone that they did not make their decsion based upon 20th century technology, but they captured thier photo with morden day technology. In conclusion, I belive that "The Face" was a just a natural landform. I belive this because of the eveidence that NASA provided and the fact that they went back to space and took anthor picture with up to date technology.

34

0a238c3

Driverless cars have been in all of our minds since television and moives have put them there. Google has had driverless cars since 2009, but are they safe to be in one. While haveing a driverless car seems epic it does have some downfall to it. Driverlesss cars , or smart cars, are a bad idea because it cost a large amount of money, a driver must be on the wheel and on alert at all times, and it even has problems with the law. Driverless cars in the late 1950s had to run on a special track. The smart-road systems worked well. It was actully a succesful test, but it would have require massive upgrades to the existing roads. The roads would be too expensive to upgrade. So instead of smart-roads they moved on to smart cars. The smart cars would need a lot of sensors to work. The senors would of course become more advance, but so well the cost. Although the smart cars cost a large amount it also still needs a driver at the wheel. The car can handle speeds up to 25mph, but the sensors make sure the dirver hold on to the wheel. Even though it is a smart car none of the cars can go without a driver at the wheel. The car would need a driver for roads it can't navigat thourgh. Such as work zones and around accidents. The car can not navigat thourgh these places which is why it alerts the driver that the need to take control of the wheel. To improve this the manufacturers put cameras in the smart car to watch driver. They make sure that the driver is focused on the road. If there is a road the car needs help with, it would vibrate the seat to alert the driver. Even if the car can alert the driver the law focus on on how focused the driver is. In some states it is illegal to test a computer-driven car. Such states worry the the car would cause an accident to the passengers, and pedestrians. If the traffic laws change it would still need to cover liability of the accident. So if the car fails and caused an accident would the driver or manufacturer be at fault. So in the end driverless cars are a horribly idea. They would cost a large amount of money. As well as they are not actully driverless and needs someone to be there, and they are agist the law at some states. Driverless cars should just stay in television and moives.

34

d2196a3

I am against the development of driverless cars because they are dependent on others, they could endanger others, and because they are still a project. Google is planning to create driverless cars to form a new transportation system, but it doesn't seem like it could ever happen. In paragraph 2 it states that, "Google cars aren't driverless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling out of driveways or dealing with complicated traffic issues." This statement shows that these so called driverless cars aren't really driveless yet. Drivers shouldn't have to be alert if the car is suppose to control itself and not be dependent on the driver. Another issue is that these cars could lead to the endangerment of others. Which is why I agree with the traffic laws that focus on keeping others safe. Traffic laws say that only a car that has a human driver is safe to drive, but manufacturers think that more states will follow when the car is safe. Even if they do many of the traffic laws will to be changed and new ones will come which seems like a hassle if these cars aren't even permitted to be on the roads yet. If the cars malfunction or fail on the road they could become harmful and dangerous. Especially if someone is injured in the process, there would fault against either the car or the driver. It would most likely be the cars fault if the driver was told it was driverless. More than one of these incidents could occur and people and properties could be harmed. Why go through all of that trouble to create something that could have many problems? Lastly, this driverless car is still non-existent. It is still only a project. All of these manufacturers are still planning and studying what could work to get the car to be driverless, but they are already stating that the car will work, and it will be a new form of transportation, but how would they know if they still don't know how make it driverless. At least with human drivers they are aware at all times on the road no matter what incident comes up on the road. With machines they aren't completely trustworthy to be driving on the road with others, and anything could happen to them. Even though accidents do happen with human drivers at least they know never to make the mistake again, but a machine will continue to do what it was programmed to do and will not change.

23

7e6f8db

To Whom it May Concern: The Electoral College is the cause of many political disagreements and problems whenever mentioned. Although established in the constitution, it is seen as undemocratic by many. The Electoral College takes away the ability of citizens to vote for their president; instead they are voting for Electors, not always loyal to the canidate. As a result, I believe the Electoral College should only be used in instances of a tie between two canidates. Each presidential canidate has a group of Electors, which will be part of the Electoral College process after the popular vote is taken. The Electoral College proccess consists of the selection of electors, the meeting in which the vote for both President and Vice President occurs, and then the votes are counted by Congress. (Office of the Federal Register)¹ When the popular vote occurs, and the canidates are selected, the votes are tallied, and then the electors of the two canidates attend the meeting, and then the final decision for President is made. This is viewed as undemocratic, because there have been instances where the Electoral College dissagrees with the popular vote. Such as the case of Al Gore in 2000, who won the popular vote, and then lost the Electoral vote and therefore his presidency.(Bradford Plumer)² This caused over 60 percent of voters, to wish for a direct election opposed to the electoral proccess, according to a Gallup poll, also occuring in 2000. (Bradford Plumer)² Anotherr issue within the electoral college, is the electors themselves. While they may claim to be loyal to their canidate, loyalties can be bribed, changed, or electors may even be replaced with only a certain party (Republican or Democratic). Which occured in Louisiana in 1960. The segregationists almost replaced Democratic electors, with ones who would instead oppose Kennedy, as a sabotage attempt at Kennedy's Presidency.(Bradford Plumer)² There have also been cases in which the loyalty of the elector was switched, and the citizens were seemingly forgotten at the electoral college. While there are over millions of people residing in the United States, there are only 538 Electors, and the fate of our country is put in Electors who can't be trusted. Over 60 percent of Americans oppose the Electoral college, but there are still some which still believe in the compromise established by our founding fathers. The Electoral College provides a smaller chance of election ties, and an equal vote from each state. While a tie is possible in the popular voting system, it is also possible in the Electoral College, with 538 electors, 269 votes from each side can cause a huge dissagreement within our Legislative System, which could be avoided by using only the popular vote. When politicians and presidential canidates are looking for votes, they most commonly travel to the larger states, because of the larger population. A larger population provides an even larger chance of obtaining voters. But, this leaves the small states with no attention from canidates, and a smaller population weakens the states chance of the canidate they desire. Every vote counts for a canidate,5,559 voters from Ohio, and 3,687 from Hawaii stopped a tie by voting. (Bradford Plumer)² Even the small states contribute in a presidential elections, their votes are just as big as ours, even if their states ae small. The founding fathers formed the Electoral College as a compromise, and hundreds of years later, I believe it is time for a compromise once again. The popular vote, should become the deciding vote for who is elected as President, Vice President, etc. With this, the chance of a tie comes, so i propose that the Electoral College remain only for the purpose of a tie in the popular vote, or if state legislature has reason to believe this canidate is not the best for America. ¹Excerpt from "What is the Electoral College?" by the Office of the Federal Register,from www. archives. gov/federal-register/electoral-college/about. html. In the public domain ²Excerpt from " The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best laid defenses are wrong" from Mother Jones by Bradford Plumer. Copyright © 2004 by Mother Jones and the Foundation for National Progress. All Rights Reserved. Permission Pending.                           

56

3c0e026

Would you be against or for the use of technology to claim emotional expressiosn? Many people will go for it and many will go against it, it really depends on how you look at it. There are plenty of supporting examples that you can use wheter you are for or against it. For me I do not like the use of this technology. I do not like the idea of the use of this technology. For one reason this could be way inncorect and give you false information. It is most likely that this technolgy will not be all the way correct. Based on looks you cannot tell what percent is sad, angry,happy, or fearful. Also, like the passage said in paragraph seven the steps "While looking in the mirror." Just one slight expression on your face can change the percents. So, if you smile and your not happy there will be more percent happy than you really are. Many people cover up sadness or being angry by smiling. So if they smile the technology will be incorrect. That smile could change a lot of the percents. The only one who knows how happy, angry, or sad you are is yourself. You may be able to cover up all the sadness in your life by smiling and not being down, even though you really are. Therefore thoes are just a few of my reasons that I don't like the technology. One expression could change how the results come back. Also, there is no way the test could be all the way correct. Whether you ar efor it or against it, I just don't think this is how to figure out how you are feeling. Like I said earlier in the essay the only one who knows how you are feeling is you.

23

af908be

Dear State Senator, We should forget about the system of electorial college to vote for a president. It just isn't fair, reason why is beacause you are electing people to vote for the person who is trying to be president of the U.S although that doesnt mean that you both are voting for the same person that's trying to be president of the U.S. The electorial college system is corrupted and needs to stop being used to elect a president. To begin, In the source 2 they state the following "60% of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now." Reasons why is because the electorial college is unfair it can make the person who had most of the votes lose because of the people who voted for the person to vote for a president choose the other runner up and make the person with the most votes actually lose. This is why people wish to have a direct election so they wont have to worry about their vote not going to the other runner up president. Secondly, The reason why the electorial college is wrong is because we dont have our own voice; but the slate of electors do which can be pretty much anybody. For example in the article "What's wrong with the electorial college" they state (If you lived in Texas, for instance, and wanted to vote for John Kerry, you'd vote for a slate of 34 Democratic electors that pledged to Kerry) these elctors can be anyone and still doesn't have to be voting for him though. Although, If the people can rebalence the electorial college system then it can be somewhat a good thing. I can see how it can be somewhat balenced already; stated in the first source "the whole electorial college has a total of 538 electors. The president you wish to elect has to have a majority of 270 electorial votes in order to win." That means they need to have 270 more votes than the other president too. Finally, so should the electorial college be abolished? unless people can find ways to limit the loosing president to come back with electoral votes, then yes this system should be banned. Sincerly, PROPER_NAME

23

151a2ea

Alien's have been a question many astronauts and people from all around the world have been wondering about for ages. But do they actually exsit? A few years ago NASA discovered what seemed to look like a face on Mar's surface. Many think that the so called "Face" was created by alien's. But others think it was just created by natural causes just like how some landforms are created on Earth. How do you think that the formation was created? So far NASA hasn't discovered any alien markings or any other form of life on other planets. This is one of the reasons why the formation was created by natural causes and not by alien's. Just like on Earth we discover something new every day, such as new landforms and new natural resources. The formation couldn't of been formed by alien's because where did they get the tools to make it? If aliens exsited, i think we would have more evidence. Alien's don't exsit becuase we would have found some evidence of diffrent life on diffrent planet's by now. If their are no aliens then their are no alien made objects on Mars. Alien's probably would have found a better communication rought then sending us weird landforms that dont have much meaning at all. Why of all things would the aliens create a face? Even if aliens did exsit i don't think it is their goal in their life to scare us humans. They would probably make something more reasonable, like a house or something like a shelter. Along with the formation there are also many landforms on earth that are similar. Such as the Grand Cannon and things like that. Think if the humans lived on Mars and we came to Earth and saw the Grand Cannon we would automatically think that there must be life here since there is no other way this could have been formed. Just as we believe there is life on Mars we would assume their is life here. Untill their is more evidence about alien's we should not believe that they exsit. As it says in the artical "What the picture actually shows is the Maritian equivalent of a buttle or mesa-landforms common around the American West." This landform represents many of the already discovered landforms on earth such as the Grand Cannon and their is no official evidence that aliens exsit this is obviously a naturally formed landform and not created by aliens.

23

1180164

The author supports the claim in a very understandable factor. It plays a part in the story to inform you more knowledge about Venus. The author is basically telling you what he knows, explaining the subject may be easy to read , but you wants you to understand it too. For example, when he said "A thick atmosphere of 97 percent co2 blankets Venus." Then giving you an supporting detail to where you could understand the meanning of his statement. The author obviously studies a big part of his work to infrom and coclude with lots of details in the story , thats the great big meaning of the supporting detail and main message of the story. Now to conclude this paragraph , the author uses scientific purposes in the story to get his point across from. Using the knowledge he gave himself to under the the inform he was trying to do. Thats how the author supports the idea of studying Venus is worthy pursuit despite all the dangers. Thats the perfect example that fits along with my answer.

01

7094f7e

Some people believe that the "Face on Mars" is just an alien artifact. Although these people believe this, it is not true. The "face" that was discovered on the surface of Mars was really just a mesa. This was proven, when scientists used a special camera to capture what we were really seeing. The camera used showed everything that it captured. It was so clear that no matter what it had taken a picture of you'd be able to tell exactly what it was. This was a huge attraction to everyone. This topic bacame very popular. The truth was then revealed. The huge attraction, the "Face on Mars", was just a landform. Things like this were commonly found around Cydonia, thus proving that things like this are somewhat common in this area. The picture taken showed a butte or a mesa which are said to be commonly found in the American West. It was even compared to the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho, a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa. In conclusion the disception of the "Face on Mars" was all just a misunderstanding. The truth was unfolded an now the world knows what the "Face on Mars" really was; a mesa.

12

8eec829

I disagree with this technology. you can make all kinds of facial expressions it doesnt mean there is a certain face for one facial expression. We are all human but we arent same that is what makes all unique we have different faces for different expression. This technology that is being used is not going to tell you everyone is mad or sad, happy, angry. I dont have the same mad as someone else would so what i make one face and im mad? it could just be my face and the way i look and your gonna tell me that i am mad when you really dont have a clue. We cant tell if someone is mad or sad, depressed or even happy they have those feelings themself and sometimes people dont want others to know if there upset so then your just invading there privacy. That could just make things ten times worse than what it already is. There are things we want people to know and that we dont want people to know and its our decsion on whether we want them to know. So yes i disagree with this facial expression technology i dont think we should be invading others privacy that way i think we need to have way more respect for others than what we do now.

12

e426299

We should change the Electoral College to election by popluar vote. As its states in the text "The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational." When you vote for a president, your actually voting for a state elector. It is possible that the winner of the electoral vote wont win the national popular vote, but that happens rarely. Over 60% of voters would prefer direct elections. Voters doesnt vote for the president in the electoral college, they actually vote for the slate of electors. Wouldnt you want to vote for the persident you want except voting for the electors? Its unfair that some states has more representatives than others because if its up to to the representatives big states, such as California has 55 representatives which represent 35 million voters. So as a example if the votes are tied and its up to Wyoming and California to decide who is president, Obama or Romney, and if California representatives voted for Romney, then even if Wyoming representatives voted for Obama, Romney would of won. They should let us (citizens of America) vote for president except for the electors. In my personal opinion, there would be a higher amount of votes per president. It'll be fair if the president would be elected by the most popular votes. The president that has thhe most votes should be the one who wins it all.

12

d521177

I really don't think that aliens could have done this. actually i could give you a few reasons why and reason one, that just sounds crazy. Aliens dont exsit. It's just a natural land form. There are all kinds of dents and holes on these planets. Besides the natural landforms are common enough around Cydonia. "in the article it states, "Thousands of anxious web surfers were wating when the image first appeared on the JPL web site, revealing...a natural landform. There was no alien mounment after all." Reason two is landforms are common around the American west. The test even states, "What the picture actually shows is the Martail equivalent of a butte or mesa-landfors common around the American West." Finally reason 3. If ypu look at the pictures long enough, the longer "the face" has been there there more it transfors into a dent and looks nothing like a face. I believe its a landform and hopefully these reasons help you beive it too. The scienctists proved has the facts that it is a landform and not a alien face.

12

7a1fe31

There are many advantages of limiting car usage. Elisabeth Rosenthal writes "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars" to show that limiting car usage helps to "reduce greenhouse gas emissions from tailpipes..." Their goal is to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases being released into our atmosphere because it is destroying Earth. The gases are destroying the ozone layer drastically, and if this continues Earth will be gone. She also wrote "The End of Car Culture" explaining that the number of cars bought has reduced, bu in reality it is a good thing because it reduces the amount of pollution in the air, and money could be used on something more productive. Cars have not been the main priority of in America. People began to carpool, ride bikes, ride the bus, etc. This will "save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety." Additionally, Robert Duffer writes "Paris bans driving due to fog" explaining how "Paris typically has more smog than other European capitals..." In Paris, many people are using cars, and they release the bad smoke into the atmosphere. By all the gases being combined together, it creates smog which is deadly. It can cause many health problems to humanlife and the nature. Another article to support that it is better off to limit car usage is "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" by Andrew Selsky. Selsky quotes a business man Carlos Arturo, "'It's a good oppurtunity to take away stree and lower air pollution.'" Even citizens agree that it is necessary for people to limit how much they drive because it streeses people out. They don't have to worry about spending a drastic amount of money on gas, or repairing the car. It is easier just to ride a bike which helps you save money, and even get a good execrise. It also limits air pollution because less cars are being driven and not alot of harmful gases are being released. Overall, there are benefits in not having a car.

23

b4683aa

In my opinion i think that we shouldn't continue with elector college. I think we should change it to election by popular vote for president of the united state, it seems like it would be an easier process. The elector college is very very unfair, its a disaster, so it should be removed. If we were to make it to were whoever became president was the one that had the most vote people would proabky be so much happier. More poeple would proably have the president of there choice if it worked that way. To make people happy give them what they want right? Well let us pick. Elector college is a very unfair process! With the winner-take-all system in each state canidates dont spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning in. So they focus on the staes they know they can win, they don't challenge themselfs. The easy way is always the right way! The Elector college caused a very bad thing in 2000 the biggest electon crisis in the century happened. So clearly the Elector college can cause some very big problems to occur. I feel that voting this way is a very stupid thing to do and that vote by popularity should be the way that we vote for our president. Its less complicated this way.

12

e801b3a

Today many students often get bored in their classrooms while going through a lesson or just by simply doing their work. These students may often resort to using their cellular device or any other electronics to keep them pre-occupied. I feel as if bringing in a more advanced peice of technology that can read the expressions of these children can make a better learing enviorment for them and make their studies more enjoyable and it doesnt only have to be used for students it could be benifical to others such as professors, doctors, animators and many more. Everyday a person is able to detect wether or not how a person is feeling just by the look that they have on their face. Some of these expressions may convey happiness, worried, sad and much more. But sometimes it may be difficult to decifer wether or not those are the emotions that they are actually feeling at the time.Yet Dr. Huang's new computer software,"stores similar anatomical information as an electronic code." " Prehaps Dr. Huang's emotional algorithms are a different sort of "Da Vinci code." Using this computer may also help students by, knowing wether you feel happy or sad. Or wether your confused or bored. The computer will "modify its lesson, like an effective human instuctor." Which may advocate a better learning enviornment. This new technology may improve the attendance of students and hopefully make them more willingly to be more involved in their education. This may also increse graduation rates as well as college acceptance rates. Finally, using Dr. Huang's new computer software program, may make it eaiser for surgeons who have difficulties planning out more extencive and more invasive surgeries, use a more advanced form of "video surgery". This new software may also be benifcial to video game disigners and animators by " making computor-animated faces more expressive." As mentioned in the article "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication. So computors need to understand that, too". Meaning that understanding how humans already communicate their algorithms will not be similar those to a regular PC. As one may be able to see, using Dr. Huang's new software program may be benifical to students, doctors, animators and many more just by being able to recognize the emotions not only displayed on the outside but using the muscles in your face to differenciate the ones you feel in the inside.to create a more intresting enviornment to the area around them.

34

58f5eb3

In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" it states how many car companies are considering switching to driverless cars. There are many postive and negative aspects to driverless cars. I personally think that driverless cars is an awful idea. One example of why I think that we should not have driverless cars is people will stop paying attention to what is going on around them. These days there are millions of wrecks happening because people are too busy on their phones or messing with the radio. They completly ignore that they could risk hurting themselves and hurting the passengers that is riding along. There is already a problem with teen texting. With these driverless cars the teenagers will think it will be an easier way to text while in the drivers seat and not get pulled over or cause a wreck. In the article it states that there will be an alert to let someone know when to take over. But, there is always going to be the chance that the way of the alert could break or not notify the person in time to take over. This could cause danger to people inside and outside of the vechicle. I also think that if people were to think they were going to be alerted, they would be able to drive home after drinking. This could cause a huge amount of danger to everyone around them. Since the car is a driverless car and it is going to be very rare the vechicles will be very expensive. I personally think that it could be two times the cost of a regular car. Also if a piece in the vechicle was to break it would be very costly to fix. These pieces would be made to go into a driverless car and without them everyone could be put at risk. Since they are so rare it would cost a lot of money and time to find excatly what you need. Many people may agree that driverless cars will be more efficient to helping people out who have kids or even the elderly. But I personally think that they are wrong. Driverless cars will not help improve the life we have today. They will make people think that it is okay to not pay attention to what is going on outside of the car and cause more wrecks. The cost to purchase or fix a driverless car would be highly expensive. I highly reccomend not purchasing a driverless car.

34

62c323b

It's already hard enough expressing your own feelings, but trying to figure out someone else's can be a real challenge. Feeling so many emotions at once can make people angry, frustrated, or even depressed because they don't know how to handle it all. Emotions are hard to explain, after reading the article and seeing that a computer can read them in the blink of an eye than it might be safe to say that it could help people more than they think. The article says that the new program can tell even if you're faking a smile or pretending to be happy. Being a teenager, knowing when someone is unhappy or pretending to be happy can be big thing. They might need to talk to someone but don't want to show it because they don't want to seen as weak or feel more emotion than they already do. If teachers had this technology in the computers to know how a student is feeling in class it could be a huge adavantage. That way a teacher can try and talk to the student or keep a close eye on them to make sure they get better. The article also says "... you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face". It's easy to fool someone with a look but this technology can analyze each muscle in the face and tell how the person actually feels. Isn't it important for a teacher to know how a kid feels? They can't pay attention as much if something on their mind is taking most of their attention. When walking into a class, you can tell what kind of day it will be by seeing everyone's expression on their face. Throughout the day though, there can be so many different emotions going around. From a bully you can feel scared, sad, worried, depressed, and so many other emotions but you can't say anything because you're also afraid of the situation getting worse. Anyone can fake emotions and people do it everyday just to get through it all. When no one is around though that's when we can let it all out and hope the next day will be different. How this technology can help is seeing if a student is feeling the same everyday whether it be a personal problem, bullying, feeling alone, or even depression. It can get worse everyday, but if a computer can see that it is faster than anyone else and alert a teacher that something is wrong then thats one kid saved from a whole life filled with those emotions. It could prevent the emotions after being bullied, after a loss, or even suicidal emotions. The hard thing is trying to connect with that person so they have the trust and strength to open up. It's not easy opeing up to someone. People go around saying "it isn't hard" or "the sooner you do, the sooner you'll feel better!". What people sometimes don't think about is that how hard it really can be. The person trying to help can't feel those emotions; they don't know what the other person is thinking about. The student could have a hundred thoughts going on inside their head but they don't wanna talk about it because if they do then they have to deal with all the emotions at once. It's easier to hold it in than letting it all out. The technology is great and could help a lot of kids in need of someone or something to show how they truly feel. When a teacher sees how the kid feels, they can try in every way possible to make that kid feel safe so they feel compfortable opening up. The article says that the software reads the different muscles in our faces to show how we feel even if we are faking it. It's like a lie detector for emotions! If a kid had someone walk up to them and ask if they are okay then the kid might lie; this program could help show what's wrong without the kid saying a thing. It shows all the emotions the kid is feeling and then someone can help get down to what is making them feel that way. People feel different emotions everyday, and we, as people, make those emotions. We can create laughter to make someone feel happy or we can bully to make someone feel like they're nothing. How people feel is something that seems only humans can explain, that no tech in the world can feel the same as we do. Fortunetly, this tech doesn't have to feel, all it has to do is show what we feel. All we have to do is decide if we want to give it a chance or keep putting on that fake smile.

45

0e51031

The author suggest that studying Venus is worth it despite the risk,probably because he thinks that Venus and Earth are similar.Or because he thinks we may find life on Venus then Mars also because Venus is closer to Earth then Mars is. According to the passage the author states that "Long ago,Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life,just like Earth."The texts also states that"Today Venus still has some features that are analogous to those of Earth.The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys,mountains,and craters.The text also states that "NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus.For example some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's Surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions." There are also many differences in our planet compared to Venus. For example"On the planet Venus the surface tempeatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit,and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet.The texts also states that "Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet ir our solar system,even though Mercury is closer to the sun,Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes,powerful earthquakes,frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface."The text also states that"the conditions are far more extreme that anything else humans have encountered on Earth,Such an enviornment would crush even a submarine accustomed to driving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals." In conclusion I personally dont think that its a good idea risking lifes to explore Venus even if it may be Earth's "Twin" it's too dangerous and to risk to send people to explore life forms up there,It will also be way to risk if they dont find any kind of life on Venus while they're risking there lifes.

23

b3734f1

Driverless cars. Should they be a thing, or shouldn't they be a thing? They are capable of many things and they're not even fully made yet. They could be capable of sensing other cars or danger. For example, Google's modified Toyota Prius uses position-estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, there's a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, and many more things. I think these cars should be a thing in our society because they could benefit us in a lot of ways. Yes, these cars aren't 100% advanced right now, but, so aren't electric cars, or cars that run on gas. Cars are cars, they will always get better through out the years. No car is a right car. Smart cars seem like a good idea to me. They are basically... smart. Just like our cellphones they can play music, tell you where you are if you're lost, you can even call people from them. Also, fuel wouldn't be such a big problem. We would use less gas, less gas means less money the U.S. would borrow from other countires. They could help our new generation in many ways. I agree with the development of the cars because they seem much more safer. Like I mentioned, their sensors are well advanced. They could sense danger. When you're not paying 100% of your attention to the road, your car would let you know whats going wrong. That right there tells me that smart cars could reduce deaths by a lot. Most deaths in the U.S. are caused by driving, if your car lets you know that something is wrong, it basically just saved your life. Lastly, smart cars could be useful for us in this new generation. People like to text, but thats a horrible idea when you're driving. If you text while you're driving you're basically risking your life. Smart cars could read your texts when you're driving. Also, people don't like being late to work, school etc. Most of the reasons why people are late is because of bad road conditions or traffic. Yes smart cars can't drive around these conditions but Google cars alert the driver to take over the wheel when things like this happens. Also they have a gps on them, since they're made through google they could have google maps in the system & that could tell you the fastes route to your desired destination. I totally agree with the development of these cars. These cars could benefit us in many ways and are well advanced for our generation so far. They can help you find the fastest route to your destination, they would reduce the use of gas by a lot. Also, they can sense danger & warn you. That seems like a huge positive safety feature. Lastly, they can drive independently under specific conditions. If conditions are bad, they alert you to take over the wheel. So yes, I totally agree with the development of these cars.

34

02b6da9

i think that technology is valuable because you can tell when peoples expressions show they have a emotion like when their eyebrows go up their surprised or if their lips tighten up their angry so that's really cool because you can tell when their mad, sad,happy and thats how people can tell someone is having a bad day or just sad over something really bad so thats why i agree cause i always wanted to know what people are feeling. this evidence i got it from the article saying that thieir having technology where you can tell what people are feeling inside of them or if their mad at you or other stuff so its really cool that they invented this technology cause now people can see peoples emotions and we could never do that. the whole point of this article is about inventing a technology where everyone can tell what your emotions are and what your body expresses those are your emotions and thats how people know what your are expressing.

01

933fdf9

There are many advantages of having limitations in car use. Some examples include less car Pollution, less stress on car users, more people starting to walk, and having a sense of community, and even less stress on car users. Car pollution is a serious issue that the world faces. Constantly people are using cars, trucks, and commercial vehicles to get from point A to B. With a whoping 7 billion and growing people in the world you can start to get a sense of how many people are polluting our air. Fortunately there are many ways that we can limit car usage in the world and many have started to work on solutions already. In the article "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars" by Elisabeth Rosenthal she explains that in Vauban, Germany Residents are taking a stand against car use. She goes on to explain that 70 percent of the Vauban families do not even own cars and more than half of the population sold their cars so that they could move them and their families to the society. One women a mother of two said "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way", this goes to show you that communities like this could make a differense not only by not using cars but also by lowering stress on people and making them more happier. Based on the Article "Paris bans driving due to smog" by Robert Duffer Paris recorded days of pollution soon after they decided to have a ban on driving to clear the air. The smog in the air due to the pollution in the air was in quote "rival to Beijing, China one of the most polluted cities in the world". Imagine if every country decided to have a national day or even a week of no cars the ammount of pollution in the air would significantley decrease. In reference to that in Bogota, Colombia thats exactly what they are trying to accomplish. Based on the article "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" by Andrew Selsky it has become the thir straight year cars have banned with only buses and taxis permitted for the day without cars in the capital city of 7 million. Since the mid 1990's an improvement plan began in Bogota know as "the day without cars" the plan is to ban all cars in colombia there efforts have even ended up spreading ideas to other countries such as Paraguay. With the limitations car use in these countries pollution will continue to decrease. In conclusion car use is something that should be limited  in all countries to save the planet. By creating communties in Vauban, germany that ban car use as well as having car use free day the world will slowley but surley begin to realize what all these efforts are accomplishing. The less car use the more clean air.

34

53e4b2e

Can you imagine a world with free personal transportation? A world where there's not a need to own a car,becsuse the public tansporation is free and reliable. Public transportation such as the city bus is a common mode of travel within the city,but replacing independent driving with automatic cars is a controversial subject. In my opinion,driverless cars are a wonderful invention. As it is commonly known,there is a ridiculous amount of c02 polluting out air. I think that lower amounts cars out driving would improve the air quality and the health of wildlife in the area. Drivers may become bored more easily when driving because they are not focusing on driving but in my opinion even this is a positive factor. I say that its a positive factor, because people tend to get distracted while driving which could cause crashes. Car wrecks are completely avoidable,and I think should make changes in technology to prevent occurences like that. All in all,I think that self driven cars are a positive innovation. I hope to see them on the road soon.

12

b0fa8bc

Some people thinks that the face on mars was an alien. Actually, it was the natural landform that formed on mars. Although it may looked like an alien, Scientists figured that it was just another Martian Mesa. After the rumors kept spreading that the face was an alien, Global Survey spacecraft revealed the Face on Mars for what it really is. First of all, Mars Global Surveyer flew over Cydonia for the first time with Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera. They snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original viking photos. Then, they revealed that it was a natural landform, saying there was no alien monument after all. Since not everyone was satisfied, Mars Global Surveyer drew close enough for a second look. After that, they researched what the picture actually shows. As they looked, the picture was the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa, which were landforms common around the American West. According to the picture, Mars Global surveyers figured that the face was just a natural landform. Lastly, the above reasons and evidence shows that the face on Mars was just a natural landform. Furthermore, the face on Mars had played the most interesting role on Mars Global Surveyers, NASA, Scientists and us. Reason being, the fact that we all were curious about the face and had to figured out if the face was an alien or a natural landform. Therefore, the face on Mars was interesting.

23

416fcdf

"All of our development since World War II has been centered on a car, and that will have to change," said David Goldberg, an official of Transportation for America. To some or most a stament like this may seem outlandish or absurd. We use cars for daily life, to make it through this world, whether its to work, school, the store, it seems almost impossible to live without one. Vauban, Germany is an upscale community of suburban pioneers who have simply given up their vehicles. As many as 70 percent of Vauban's famalies do not own cars. Heidrun Walter, a resident and mother of two, says she is "much happier this way". So what it is that has caused many communites like Vauban to take the advantage of living without a car? Green House gases better known as smog, that is polluting our air that we breathe. In some places like the beloved Paris, home of the Eiffel Tower, smog has gotten out of hand. Paris has even enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. After 4,000 drivers were fined and twenty seven had their cars impounded for their claimed reaction to the fine, the congestion was finally down 60 percent. Beijing, China, known for being the most polluted cities in the world the smog rivals. You might even see people wearing masks in Beijing for their own health and safety. Bogota, Colombia has caught on and spread this idea to other countries as well. For the third straight year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis allowed for a Day Without Cars. Not even rain or shine stopped Colombians from traveling accordingly. Instead of being pessimistic about traveling alternatively most Colombian see it as a good opprutunity to take away stress and lower smog. So, imagine a day without cars in the bustling city of our own, maybe like Detroit. Well it seems that President Obama is catching on. Recent studies suggest a drop in Americans getting licenses', buying cars, and driving all together as years pass. The number of miles driven in the United States peaked in 2005 and is dropping from there steadily. Could it be that Americans love for cars is simply not what it used to be? Or is it that more alternate and practical ways of travel are now being provided and accepted widely? Either way if our country keeps up the good work sociologist believe it will have "beneficical implications for carbon emissions and the enviroment". Meaning we are one step closer to riding our home planet of dirty air.        

23

5bdedc7

The face on mars was first found by the spacecraft called Viking one and was cirling mars when it found the face. alot of people belive it is a real artifact. NASA has took more pictures to prove that it is infact not an artifact. People belive there just covering it up so pople wont know about it. But that is not true it would benifit NASA if it were an true artifact. The face on mars is just a lndform because of the pictures we took we could not see and form of building structure. one thing that brings me to this conclusion is the rocks and shadows made it look and seem very real. The text states "...formed by shadows...". Tv and other things are what is drawing the attention to the matter andthey are whats broadcasting to the world that it is real. The text states " It starred in a hollywood film , appeared in books , magazines, radio talk shows..." This brings me to the conclusion that infact it is not real but was made real by televison and other things. People just dontt wanna listen to the since behind it. If it where in fact real it would benifit NASA.

12

04db8d6

We have a Universe full of uncertainties and dangers. Since that is the case, should we just give up trying to discover new things? No, of course not, Then why should Venus be any different. It might be a risky and dangerous job but, this might also be a golden opportunity to, maybe find out connections between Venus and our Earth. Astonomers believe that Venus used to be an Earth-like planet long ago. There are actual some features now on Venus that resmbles to Earth wiith familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and even craters. Furthermore, let us not forget the fact that Venus also sometimes is our nearest option for a plantery visit. That should be more than enough reason to try and study more of Venus. One day we might need that information, so better safe then sorry. Lastly, even though is will be difficult scientist are already figuring out safer options to study Venus, like hovering over the planet to gather intel without a real big risk. And even getting electronics tested for Venus's harsh climate. It might be difficult but, where would we be if we just gave up trying to discover new things when things get tough.

23

8392f69

The author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents very well. He used many ideas to support his claim including what others think, facts, and his own thoughts. The text states "while Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth, it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely (p1)," pointing out the challenge of exploring Venus. The author also states "humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world. Each previous mission was unmanned, and for 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. Numerous factors contribute to Venus's reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study, despite its proximity to us (p2)," telling us how dangerous Venus is. He also states "a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Farenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals. Also notable, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun. Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface (p3)," pointing out the dangerous gases, pressure, temperature, and natural disasters of Venus. "If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface (p4)?" The author states "often referred to as Earth's "twin," Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too (p2)," meaning that Venus would be the fastest planet to travel to. He also said "astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system (p4)," meaning it could truly be a future habitat for the living - and may have been inhabited once. The author also said "long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth. Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters (p4)," suggesting that Venus may have truly been Earth's "twin." He also mentioned that NASA has a compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus in a blimp-like structure (p5), which could work. The text stated "striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation (p8)," suggesting that finding a way to safely allow humans to travel to Venus will not only help us learn more about the most dangerous planet, but also will lead us to more exciting and intimidating endeavors. Not only that, but traveling to Venus will make us no longer be limited by dangers and doubts, allowing us to expand our minds. To sum everything up, the author did well with supporting his idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. He mentioned many dangers that Venus has. He also mentioned possible solutions to the problems Venus throws at us and reasons why Venus is worth studying, using facts and thoughts as support for his claim.

34

0a6ac75

Citizens of German, As you may know that you have to own a car to get around in some cases you may think to your-self that you dont have the money to get a car or the job to keep a roof over your head. Well in French and Swiss borders, Friburg runs a few streets on the adge of the community. More or less Friburg has you paying for a $40,000 car-ownership with space along with a home. 70 percent dont own a car, everyone should have a car and park where ever they want to its not right for them to have to have a $40,000 car-onwer-ship with a house just to have space. Vaubran homes are $5,500 within a rectangular square mile, 80 percent of laws have been gone to highways and the 20 percent have went to another transports. Paris has band driving due to smog they know the amound of license plats that were order to leave their cars at home or fined a $32 fine. It shouldn't matter if ther were to leave their cars at home or park it somewhere they are grown people and if something was to happen to them or the car then thats on them. It's not right to have all of these rules because, if someone was to vist a loved one and they didnt know or understand what was going on or they had gottan a fine then their going to get mad. Diesel fule makes up at least 67 percent of vehicles in France, 53.3 percent of diesle engines in Western Europe. in the mid-1990s cars without improvement campaign in Bogota. People all over wants to be safe and have nothing to worry about so why on earth would you put out there tha you have to have a car to buy a house or to have more space?. Children that are now coming out to the world that are driving is going to look at the world a different way. Between 2001-09 found that driving by young poeple decreased about 23 percent. America's love affair with its vehiclse population growth the number that had been driven in the U.S. peaked in 2005 and dropped steadily. April 2013 the number of miles drien is 9 percent below the pea an equal to where the country was in Janurary 1995.         

01

7b084d9

in source one they talk about banning driving in germany and how does it affect them but in the U.S.A if u took that baway we would probaly freak out unlike a small town in germany completly has no cars in there small town. In Levitton and Scarsdale new york some cars rare overpopulating us and causing emission smoke throughout the air and litereally choking us with fumes. The United States Of America is starting to reduce car control in some citys it is said that 80% of appropriations have by law gone to highways and only 20% to other transport. In source two it talks about paris france and its trouble with cars stsrting with the pollution or smog it has gotten so bad that the french party made a rule that people with even number plates can drive on monday,wendsday,friday and sunday while people with the odd plates drive on tuesday'thursday, and saturday. Even though china is the most polluted place paris is more polluted than any other european capital. It says in source two that paris had 147micrograms of smog per cubic meter last week wich is a lot of pollutoin to get rid of. in source three we talk about bogota wich is the site of a program that began in mid 1990s it has also seen the construction of 118 bike miles,the most by any latin america city. I am talking about car free day wich is celebrated to promote a pollution free world in bogota there are no cars only taxis and buses. If u ride a car on this day you will have to pay a $25 fine the turn out is always large despite the rain. "The rain hasnt stopped us before" says Bogota mayor Antanas Mockus. in source four we talk about the decrease of car usage in the U.S.A in 2005 is when the we peaked in driving but from there we dropped by 9% to 2013 this was equal to the country in 1995. if this keeps up it can have a negative impact on car companys because the eill be loosin money but a positive impact on the enviorment becasue car emission is the second most cause of poolution,no cars no poluttion. In the ages between 16-39 has dropped in obtaing a license while older people are more likly to get ther license. A study shows that driving by young people decreased by 23% between the year 2001 and 2009

12

243aba3

Cars have been used and started to rise since World War II. Vehicles have trended to make them fit our life and culture. But there has been so many tragic events taking place because of the use of cars and people debates whether cars should be used or not. It will be a great idea to limit cars because it will protect the environment, cut difficulties while on the road and improve safety and business. Initially, it would be a great option to limit cars because it will protect the environment. Cars are used to make it easier to transport places but it does not help protect the world around. Cars cause damage to the whole atmosphere and can harm many. For instance, in Paris, people are fined for driving because of the smog polluted in the air. According to the passage "Paris bans driving due to smog", Paris typically has more smog than other European capitals. The use of driving vehicles can make it difficult to live in the world. Furthermore, limiting the use of cars will be a big advantage to the world because it can cut difficulties while on the road. The less use of cars will lead to better circumstances while on the road. It will be easier for buses or delivery trucks to do their tasks quicker and more efficient. For example, in Bogota, many parks and sports centers have been replaced with smooth sidewalks which cut rush hour situations and traffic. The roads will be wider and more smooth for the environment. Moreover, it would be a great idea to limit the use of cars because it will improve safety and business. Most instances when cars weren't used in different regions of the world, it led to the improvement of businesses but also better safety. In Vauban, having less placement for cars created more safety for customers to go into their desired place. It also has been more accessible and compact to public transportation. Limiting less cars progresses the world all around. In conclusion, it will be a huge advantage to limit the use of cars because it will protect the enviormnent, cut difficulties while on the road, and improve businesses and safety. Using less cars will not only protect ourselves but protect the world that we live in.

34

91506ed

Dear, State Senoator I believe keeping the electoral college is best on what we know and whats fair. There are many reasons on why we should change by popular votes but keeping the electoral vote is also best on things that can be better for the united states. "Voters in toss-up states are more likely to pay close attention to the campaign-to really listen to the competing candidates-knowing that they are going to decide the election. They are likely to be the most thoughtful voters, on average....." This qoute explains how the most loyal and is trust worthy voter that they focus on who is best to be our president and to let them choose who should are president be and to able to recieve the most information and attention from the candidates. "Voters in presidential elections are people who want to express a politcal prefrence rather than people who think that a single vote may decide an election......"in this qoute they explain how the people who vote get to express a political prefrence than a person who just votes just to see if they can make a diffrence in just one vote .The reason larger states get more attention than small states is because the population is higher in the large states and the more people there is have diffrent opinions. This is why we should keep electoral college votes instead of changing it by popular votes  

23

7beb5b6

Technology has helped numerous people throughout time. The works of a Facial Action Coding System could help with a great deal of situations. They could help students that do online schooling with being taught a different way. It could let people know what kind of mood someone is in without talking to them. Facial Coding is another way for technology to assist everyday life. Facial Action Coding should be used. Online schooling could become even better. People often go to school with a teacher so when they are confused the teacher can work with them. If computers can have this kind of facial recognition then the teacher would be able to see when you are confused. The text states,"A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." Students can sometimes be worried about asking questions and looking stupid this gives them a chance to still learn the material but not be worried. People will be able to tell when someone is upset. Occasionally, when working for a resturant and getting someones order a hostile customer might walk up and it will be unknown they are in a mood until talking to them while with a coding system preparing for an angry customer is eaier. Friends will be able to know what kid of feelings are going on around you. People sometimes lie about their emotions to everyone but this will be a way even if someone is lying it will know. People who are suicidal will be easier to keep an eye on. When someone is sad and depressed research has shown that they can keep it bottled up and no one will know until it is too late but this technology can help prevent that. Technology increases in everyone's life everyday. It is meant to make our lives easier. Being able to see someones feeling from a screen will make talking to someone better. The use of tchnology has increased so much that having something that can tell emotion might help with the people around us to not feel so weird to talk someone. The way that it can help your mood was said that,"If you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different." Ads can be annoying when looking at something interesting but if you have an ad about something that is important to you then you are more liekly to enjoy the web page you are already on and potentially make another purchase. Facial Action Coding should be used. The facts have backed up howit will postively affect people and their lives. Teachers will be able to teach and reach the maximum amount of learning. People can tell what kind of mood someone is in and choose how they should talk. Technology is so advanced that it will be useful in getting conversations started. There is nothing wrong with wanting to see how someone is feeling and what kind of mood they are in.

34

2050ae7

The Electoral College. A process not a place. The Electoral College was established by the founding fathers as a compromise between election of Presidents. It works by a popular vote by qualified citizens. I am aganist the Elctoral College because it is unfair to voters and the voters don't vote for the Presidant they vote for the slate of electors. Why is it unfair to the voters? Now it's unfair to the voters because of the winner take all system. Candidates don't spend time in states they knoiw they have no chance in winning, so they foucs on the "swing states" In the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't get spoken to by any candidates at all. If anyone has a argument for putting the fate of the presidency in the hands of a few swing voters in Ohio. Voters dont vote for the President. They vote for the slate of electors. Electors are and can be anyone that deosn't hold a postion in a public office. Now we the people dont pick the electors in the first place. Depending on the state, sometimes the state party's central committee choose, sometimes the presidential candidates choose them self. Voters can sometimes contorl whom their electors vote for, but not all the time. Sometimes the voters get confused about the electors and they go off voting for the wrong candidate. To me that's un-fair to the voter because they are not voting for the presidant but for an a elector that can mess up and vote for the wrong candidate. So concludeing to me claim, I'm aganist the Electoral College because it's unfair to the voters ts's self and that the voters dont vote for Presidants, but for electors.

23

4923deb

In the artical "Driverless Cars Are Coming." the author presents both positive and negitive aspects of driverless cars. Some positive aspects that are shown are that, no one would have to drive anymore, the cars would drive themselfs. some negitive aspects are, they are not "safe" yet, and when they are safe there will still be at least one accadent and who will be charged? The owner or the manufacturer? I think that self driving cars would be a good thing for society because there would be less accadents and a lot of hours would be saved becuse trafic would move much more smoother due to the lack of car accadents. There would be down sides to such as what if the car randomly breaks down as the passenger is asleep, or if the driver sees that there is going to be an accadent and does not have good reaction time or the skills needed to drive the car? Other than that the car would be very bennafical to scociety.

12

f08691e

Do you think that the Face on Mars is a natural landform, or do you think that it was created by aliens? The picture of the Face on Mars was captured on May 21, 2001, and a few days later it was shown to the public which got this whole thing started. Most of the people from NASA believed that it was just a natural landform, but conspiracy theorists believed the it was created by aliens on Mars. The MOC team snapped a picture ten times sharper to reveal a natural landform. It was just a huge rock formation which resembled a human face, and the defenders of the NASA budget wished there was an ancient civilization on Mars because they would benefit off of it. A few days after the photo of the Face was snapped, they showed it to the public for everbody to see. The NASA team caption the photo with "huge rock formation...which resembles a human head...formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and a mouth." Some people believe that the Face was created by aliens on Mars. NASA and many scientists believed that it was just another Martian Messa. Martian Messas were common enough around Cydonia. On April 5, 1998, The MOC team snapped a picture that was ten times sharper than the original Viking Photos. The photo first appeared on the JPL web site, and it revealed a natural land form. Since the Face was located at 41 degrees north martian latitude, it was winter at the time they snapped the picture which was in April of 1998. At this time, it was cloudy on the planet Mars, so the camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the Face. Conspiracy theorists said that maybe the alien markings were hidden behind the haze. Lastly, the defenders of the NASA budget wished there was ancient civilization on Mars. If aliens did exist and NASA did discover them or signs of them, then NASA would benefit off of it. NASA would most likely send people or some kind of camera to take better pictures and videos of Mars. NASA would not keep it to themselves, they would share it with the public. After all this time survaying and taking pictures of Mars, they have not found alien life form on Mars. In conclusion, the Face is just a natural landform like many others. The Face just happens to be unique because of it's many shadows that make the Face resemble an actual face. Many rock formations happen on the planet of Mars. The Face is no different then the many thers of it's kind. The Face is the most unique and interesting landform found on Mars the is one of the many natural landforms presents on the planet Mars.

34

caa6e26

The logical explination for the face being on the moon is the metiors had to hit the planet Mars and they all had landed together to make a face like object in this planets crust to make it look like this. Well because in this acrticle it says in paragraph 3 it was a huge rocks formation. Also another logical explination would be it was really hot one day and a big fire had started on a mountin where there was lots of dried out land and a big fire started and when the fire stated there was a big spot and the fire had reached it and then it was it the praticular shape of a face so it stood out onto the earths crust. It also says in paragraph 12 that it is a lava dome . This big landmark could also be made by a big cannion or mountain that is in a direct shape of a face or just a bunch of trees could be gathered together to have a perfect form or shape of a face. In pargraph 12 it also talks about a plain which is a open area with alot of mountains. Anways this all has an explinations other than aliens doing it. Also like there could have been a massive sand storm and the wind picked up really heavy and was throwing rocks and blew alot of sand and rocks and it could have created a face like object that you see when you look through a telascope at mars. Also say a huge rock formation in paragraph 3

12

84bdfb7

Some peope think that the landform was created by alien's, but have no evidence. You can clearly see in the picture that theres a shadow on the landform. People have even proved that it was a shadow on the landform. You can also conclude that there are no alien's roaming around in space making face's on landform's. People have no evidence that there are alien's roaming around in space. Alien's are only in the movie's that you see, that's only my opinion though. Even if there were alien's out there, we should have found them by now. With all our space gadget's that we have that can look deep into space, i'm pretty sure we would have found alien's by now. Even though people have "spotted" alien UFO's, they have no proof. People could have said they even spotted it, but then again since their on video, they could have photoshopped it. People can believe what they want to believe, but if you can see there's perfect evidence, you can't really argue if they have real proof.

12

a0737c2

Imagine if we found a face on the red plant Mars. Well we did and I will tell you what happend in NASA durring this. The face is a land form like the one in Idaho. The shadows are giveing the illusions of a face. And the Mars Orbiter Camera found out that it is a land form. This "Face" is just a land form wy can you guys not see that. It looks and has the same formations as the rock formation in Idaho. They both are the same hight and they both look alike. Don't forget that it looks alot like butte or mesa. This "Face" was confurmed A few days later after NASA unveiled the image for all to see. "The caption noted a huge rock formation... which resembles a human head... formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth." Lets not forget that the "Mars Orbiter Camera team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos." "Revealing... a natural landform." There is no alien monument after all. There is no alien artifact because it has the same apperenses than the butt or mesa in Idaho. And the shodows are giving the illusion of a face. And the Mars Orbiter found that it was a natural landform.

12

b19e4c2

Driverless Cars pose many possitives and negatives. Between saftey, saving gas, and overall practicallity there are many benitfits to this new form or transportation. Driverless cars are the future of transportation and will do many great things for the comunity and the people driving them. Driverless cars are the future. People are attracted to the idea of getting in a car and having it take you somewhere without ever touching the wheel. The cars pose many possitves for our society today. For example, driverless cars use almost half the gas that the average car uses today. This can solve many world problems like global warming and keep the demand for gas low which will keep the gas prices low. Another possitive is saftey. If computer drove every car people would be much safer than they are today. Computers are smater and more consitante than humans. This is why computers and robots have taken many peoples jobs, because they do it better. If the computers are well made then they will never make mistakes, therefore decreasing the ammout of crashes. BMW has made the car safer by providing in car entertainment on a heads up display that doesnt work if the driver is texting or on there cell phone, once again making the car safer. However for some people the concept of driverless cars is scary. For driverless cars to become a part of peoples everyday lives than many things will have to change. First many states will have to allow people and companies to test thier cars in their states. The cars will never be made if they cant be tested and profected in different states. Also there are mant question with the laws behind whos fault it is if a driverless cars technology fails and someone is injured, the driver or the manufacturer? These questions will be answered with time and once every car is a self driving car then that question will be irellivent. Driverless cars are the future for the automobiel industry. They provide a safer more fuel efficent mode of traspertation that will benfit america and its citizens.

23

c36c3b8

Driverless cars are definitly an advancement in society today. Although there are slightly independent cars today, it is projected that by 2020 Mercedes-Benz, Audi and Nissan plan to have self driven automotives. In the article, "Driverless Cars Are Coming," a decent amount of benifits were listed. One of those benifits are safety features, such as the inability to use a telocommunication device while in the vehicle. Each of the self driven automotives will have regulations. While the car is in the self driving mode the opperator must be alert. By doing this the driver must have both hands on the steering wheel. The steering wheels have a sensor built in; made to ensure that when road conditions ahead need human capabilities they can take over quickly and safely. Another restriction included in the driverless cars are the ability to shut off all systems instantly. For example in-car entertainment is a privlage but may be turned off when neccessary. These self driven cars include many other features as well. GPS, Tire, motion, and radar sensors are installed in these vehicles. When in reverse newer cars have the ability to have a camera in there dash to see the surroundings behind them. Vibrating seats are a feature used to alert the driver when they are close to hitting an object around them. With these advancements in the self driving automotives the opporation system can be a copy cat of a human driver. Not only do the driverless cars have safety features but save on gas. The self driven cars are projected to recieve better gas millage, using half the fuel our automotives use today. As stated in the article by Sergey Brin, " Such cars would fundamentally change the world." Not only will each tank of gas last longer, but there will be less fumes going into the atmosphere. Advancing modern cars into self driving vehicles in a societal achievement. Having safety features such as sensors, vibrating seats, and the restriction of cellphone use will decrease accidents. These vehicles require the driver to stay alert, and detect when conditions require human assistance. The evolution of self driving cars is progressing, with a target of cars being on autopilot 90 percent of the time.

34

12a7aff

The Face was not created by aliens because there is no evidence on The Face to be able to test to see if it was created from an alien. We have searched The Face to find out to see if The Face was made by aliens, and the face was not crafted from aliens because we have not seen a single artifact, text, and/or any symbols near this landscape. Since we have not seen an artifact in the landscape we could tell that there were no aliens near this area. Since we have not seen an artifact, yes, they could have maybe known that they dropped it and culd have gone searching for it, but then what about the other aliens they could have dropped any crafting utensils at the sight. Now if there were any text in english then the text could have been from a fellow american space travelar, now if it was made by an alien the text wouldn't be in english, but there is no text in the sight because we haven't seen any so therefore it was not made from an alien, now if it were to be made from an alien they would have text or symbols on The Face because they wouldn't just leave it like that and then walk away. They would have put text or symbols. Talking about symbols there are zero amount of symbols on that artifact because like I said earlier they would have put text or symbols on the artifact, but there are none of those things. This shows how there was no chance of The Face showing that there were aliens building it.

23

ebc4033

I know many people believe that the face on Mars was created by ancient alien beings. I believe this face was a natural formation that was created by natural forces on the planet Mars. I will be laying out the possibilities on how this land formation looks like a human face. First, when we take a look at the land formation the first thing most people would see is a face. This is an illusion formed by shadows giving an alomst human face, the shadows clearly give an illusion of eyes, nose, and mouth. Secondly when Nasa took a picture zoomed up much closer to the image of the face it was actually showing the Martain equivalent of a butte or messa. These are all very common, natural landformations on our planet. They used a digital image 3 times bigger then the pixel size. So if there was anything like a airplane, egyptian-style pyramids, or a small shack they would be able to spot it and see what it is. In conclusion, I know many people believe that the face on Mars was created by ancient alian beings. I believe this face was a natural formation that was created by natural forces on the planet Mars. This is an illusion formed by shadows giving an almost human face. Secondly, they used a digital image 3 times bigger then the pixel size. So if there was anything like a airplane,egyptian-style pyramids, or a small shack they would be able to spot it and see what it is. I believe this was a natural formation created by natural forces on the planet Mars.

23

5992dc7

The development of driverless cars should not be allowed. Driverless cars would not be good in the United States. It wouldn't be good for the simple fact that it could leave a gas in the air that would pollute the world. It would be dangerous to the people who do not own a driverless car. Also the driverless car would cost billions of dollars, so most people wouln't even bother to spend their money on something like that. Driverless cars would not be a good idea for the world because it could pollute the Earth with a gas that many people could get sick from, and potientially die from. These "Driverless cars" will have to run on some type of fuel, they will not be able to run on solar power for the simple fact that some people work, and do other things at night time. The fuel that the cars will run on could get the people who are walking by the cars sick because of all the toxic fuems in the air. If everyone is sick or has passed away because of the fuems, how would the people who built and worked on these cars make money? Also another reason "Driverless Cars" shouldn't be allowed is the cost of the car. Driverless Cars will be expensive to buy, let alone the cost to have it worked on, if the car has a few issues with it. Most citizens in America are middle class citizens, meaning are not rich. So basically, only the rich, and famous people will be buying these cars. Its poitnless to spend all of your money on car, that could possibly cost more than the house you are living in. As stated in paragraph three, "General Motors, in the 1950s, tried to creat a concept car that could run on a special test track." That idea did not work because the roads the cars would have to drive on, are the ones we use, and our roads are not upgraded to that point yes. It also states in paragraph three that, "Engineers at Berkeley tried something similar, but they used magnets with alternating polarity." Once again it worked to a certain degree, but on the roads most cars drive on, they would have to do major upgrades on them. Both these ideas were very good, but will not work because of our roads that we drive on today. Many people would like to own a "Driverless Car," but cannot because of the roads we drive on today are not up to par. Driverless cars should not be allowed in the World. The gas fuems could pollute us, they would cost lot of money, and they have already tried something like that before but it did not work due to the roads we drive on. The people who built and worked on these cars would not make a lot of money due the fact that most people are middle class, and will not spend more money on car, that could possible cost more than their house they are currently paying for, or own.

34