essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 712
20.5k
| score
class label 6
classes |
|---|---|---|
571a8fb | In the artical Car Free Cities people all over the world are going carless. In German suburbs life goes on without cars. About 70percent of famles go witth out cars people there walk or ride a bike to where ever they go. In Vauban Germany street parking and driveways and home gerages are forbiden in sted people park there cars in a huge parking gerage. they buy a space when they buy a house there
In Paris after days of near record poluuution paris enforced a partial driving ban so they can clean the air. In congestion it is 60% of the captil of France. After a couple days of smog in the city on monday people with cars wth even numbered license plates. Were ordered to leave there cars at home. Almost 4,000 people were fined and some people had there cars in pounded for there reaction to the fine.
In Bogota Colombia it was the third strate year cars have been baned with only busses and taxies permited. The captil of 7 million people the goal is to the reduce of smog and to finde alternate transport. The day with out cars is part of an campaign that began in in Bogota in t emid 1990s. For the frist time two cities joyined the the day with out cars.
The End of Car Culture president Obana has ambitiouus goals to curb the United Sates greenhouse gas. Recent studies sugest that Americans are buying less cars and driving less and getting fewre licents when each year goes on. the United States is the home of the modle T and home of Detroit the place where mustang Sally was immortalized.
At the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona,spain,Bill Ford the executive charmin of the Ford mtor compiney lade out a business plan in which personal vehicle ownership is impratcil or undesirablel.
Excerpt from "The End of Car culture"by Elisabeth Rosanthal
Excerpt from "car Free Day Sprining into a big hit in Bogoat" by andrew Selsky
Excerpt from "Paris barns driving due to smog" by Robert Duffer
Excerpt from "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars " by Elisabeth Rosanthal | 01
|
fa17a90 | How many different emotions have you ever felt in your life? You cannot possibly know and remember every feeling you've ever had. Using the Facial Action Coding System is a great idea and an amazing thing that has been developed, however, there is no way it is accurate. The Facial Action Coding System is not accurate because everyone has different facial structures, this system could not possibly know the structure of everyones face, could not detect all emotions, and cannot tell an emotion by the way people look.
Though the face has the same muscles and bones in it, everyone has a different facial structure. Some peoples eyes are far apart, and some are closer together. Some people have more round faces, and others have more square shaped faces. The text states "Meanwhile, muscles called orbicularis oculi palpabraeus make crow's-feet around your eyes. But in a fake smile, the mouth is stretched sideways using the zygomatic major and a different muscle, the risorius.", but some people may not get crow's-feet around thier eyes, and some peoples mouths may not stretch sideways like this. There are many other differences in peoples faceial structures, aside from these examples.
All people feel different emotions in their life. They can also feel multiple emotions at one time. Saying that a face coding system can detect all your emotions is absurd. People have been known to feel exitement, while feeling resentment, and all other combinations of emotions. Technology today doesn't have any way of recognizing all emotions of everyone. The passage says, "Eckman has classified six basic emotions- happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness- and then associated each with characteristic movements of the facial muscles." It is not hard to guess that humans are capable of feeling more than just six emotions alone or at the same time. This would mean that the recognizing emotons part of this system is inaccurate.
Acting and looking different than how you feel is an excellent way to hide your emotions. People do this almost on a daily basis. "For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by the look on her face." Although this may be true some of the time, even smiling to hide a frown cannot always be dected by a friend. Unless clearly obvious, hiding emotions cannot easily be found. This adds to the previous reason of why the Facial Action Coding System would be inaccurate.
The Facial Action Coding System is not accurate because everyone has different facial structures, this system could not possibly know the structure of everyones face, could not detect all emotions, and cannot tell an emotion by the way people look. In conclusion, this system could be highly inaccurate and ineffective. Perhaps sometime in the future, when technology is much more developed, this system may work a little better, but it will still take many years to perfect the Facial Action Coding System. | 34
|
fd1db26 | In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars. There are many people who are against or for driverless cars today. As seen today, there are many optomistic companies who are developing driverless cars to better our future on transportation and safety. In the end, I support the development of these cars. The driverless cars are very efficient, it puts less stress on the driver, and they will be safe and easy to use.
First, the driverless cars are very efficient. As stated in paragraph 1 of "Driverless Cars Are Coming," Sergey Brin believes that driverless cars can take over the public transportation system. He envisions the cars to be a form of public-transport taxi system that can be more easily accessed to. He states that the car would use half of the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus. This means that you can find taxis more easily, and also you don't have to wait at a station or stop for a driverless car to arrive. This would cut the cost of walking for many people who live far away from their bus stop, but also help those who live far away from the city, where many taxis are present.
In addition, the driverless cars puts less stress on the driver. With the fact that many sensors are attached to the car itself, it provides the safest way for the driver to know they would not die. Many improvements in sensors and computer hardware and software could make driving safer for the machine and also make the car itself be more independent on driving. As of now, the driverless cars can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves without needing assistance from the driver. As you lay back and pay attention the road still, the car itself may flash an alert for if it needs assistance. The driver only needs to help the car only if there is a work zone that needs to be manuevered around, or accidents that the driver should avoid.
Finally, the driverless cars will be safe and easy to use. Today, many manufacturers are hoping to add more features in the car to assist the driver. They hope to add in-car entertainment for when you want to relax, and information systems that use heads-up displays to notify how fast the car is going, how far are you from the destination, and also where the next stop is. This can prevent many car accidents that happen over texting and driving as many people pay attention to their cell phone and not on the road. The driver can also choose to turn off these options and take over the wheel to drive if they are not occupied on their phone.
In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," the author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars. There are many people who are against or for driverless cars today. In my oppinion, I support the development of these cars. The driverless cars are very efficient as they use less fuel to drive and can be used as a public transportation system. They also puts less stress on the driver as the car is installed with many different sensors to prevent accidents from occuring. Finally they will be safe and easy to use as they offer in-car entertainment and information about road conditions. | 34
|
b1c3c6d | Driverless cars could be a great accomplishment. If driverless cars are made, they would improve safety on the roads
Driverless cars can improve safety on the roads. Paragraph 5 says that In the 1980's speed sensors were put on the wheels for antilock brakes, which became more advanced within ten years and made
to detect and respond when there is out of control skids or rollovers. The sensors can apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power to the engine, which cuases the car to have more control over the situation than any human driver could handle alone. BMW has made a car with touch sensors in the steering wheel making sure the driver is alert and keeps their hands on the wheel. GM has made seats that vibrate when the car is in danger of backing in to an object. Some manufacturers are planning on using cameras in the vehicle to watch the driver to make sure they are paying attention to the road.
All these reasons ensure that the driverless car will be safe and and that people will benifit from the driverless car. | 12
|
fa9b6e1 | Leonardo Da Vinci was one of the greatest reniassance painters of the time. His study of the human anatomy allowed him to create pictures that captured the humna state. On of his most well known paintings is the "Mona Lisa". The Mona Lisa is a women that has sort of complacent facial features. She doesn't really look happy or sad. This was the popular thought up until a new technology was created. This technology is called the Facial Action Coding System. This technology is able to deduce what emotion a person is feeling. It is able to do this whothout the person even showing an obvious emotion. This technology can also be implenmented in many spheres of life, including in the classroom. The use of this technology to read the expressions of students in a learning envionement can help students learn more efffectivly by allowing for immediate feedback from a student allowing for the quick shift of a lesson plan, and being able to help and support students emotionally.
This technology can help get immediate feedback from students. In almost all class rooms nation wide there is a similar routine. Learn something, practice it for homework and then see if a student is understanding it by taking a quiz over it. While this may be effective, it can be imporved ten fold with the Facial Action Coding System. The technology could understand emotion of students in present time. A teacher wouldn't have to wait to give out a quiz to see if students were having issues. They could teach the subject and then immediatly know if students are having difficulty unerstanding it. Dr. Huang, the creator of FACS, states that "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored". If teachers are able to recieve this information, their teaching would become more effective. Teachers could change lesson plans in order to fit the needs of the students, and give extra support and help to those children that are still struggling. FACS can also help excite studnets about learning. This is important because no matter how much a teacher trys to help a student, the studnet will not imporve in anything if thet do not want to learn. If computers are able to read if studnets are excited or bored by a lesson, teachers would add visuals and what not to make it more intersesting to a student. This would make them want to learn, not them being required to learn. totality, the ability to be able to percieve students emotions would help students academically by allowing teachers to change lesson plans that allow for more excitment and understand in classrooms.
To continue, the FACS technology would help students be more emotionally stable. While school is a vaulable place to learn new information and facts, it is really a place for children to grow and become more independent and better human beings. While grades matter, the emotional and pyschological health of a student is far more valuable. The FACS technology could act as an army of school counselers. High School and Middle School students tend not to share their emotions, even with their parents. FACS could idntify students that are emotionally troubled, have depression, contemplate self harm or even have mental illness. Once students like these are identified then counselers and social workers could step in, allowing for students to be helped. Right now students that struggle with these issues do not share their feelings. They do not get help and carry on like they are fine. While many may turn out to be okay, even one taking their own life or somebody's else, is too much. While FACS may not be able to help or eliminate all signs of emotional distress, it can surely make a difference. Another benfit of using FACS is that it reads emotoins silently. Students don't have to potray a certain emotion for the technology to understand what they are really feeling. If a studnet is asked how they are, they probably give a surface level, I am fine, answer. The technology reads through that completely, eliminating awkard one on one conversatoins with conselers, and allowing for all students to be reached.
While there are many positives to this technology some might argue that computers cannot actually calculate human emotion. They argue that human emotion is not somehting that can or should be understood because it would ruin the entirety of feeling certain ways. However, while some arguements may be warranted, many are based off of falsehoods. To begin, emotion can be understood on a scientific level. Emotion is in the brain, not the heart. The way the FACS understands emoion is simple. It maps out a 3-D model of the face, looks at the shape and positoin of all the muscles, then it associates the different facial movements with differet emotion. For example, your orbicularis oris (muscles around your mouth) tighten your lips to show when you are angry. It even works when a person it trying to mask emotions. During a fake smile, the zygomatic major stretches the mouth sidways, while in a real smile the zygomatic major lifts the corners of the mouth. These examples can show how science IS able to understand emotoin, probaly better than most humans. Arguments that use that falshood, that science is unable to understand emotion, is completly false.
In conclusion, the ability to read the actual emotion and reactions of students in class rooms is extremely valuable because it allows for greater understanding and excitment of a subject, along with the ability to help students be emotionally stable. If this technology is implemented into schools, studnets will overall do better, feel better and make a brighter world for tomorrow. FACS is something revolutionary that hopefully all of us can learn somthing from. | 56
|
2b57626 | You have to join Seagoing Cowboys! This gives you a chance to trave around the world.
It also give you a change to make a diffrence, and help people in needed. You can go to places like China,Philipines,Germany,Eupore,and South America. You can visit all this wonderful places if you join the Seagoing Cowboys. You have a chance to save life. You can be the diffrence bewteen life and death to some. You can meet the native peple of forein lands. You can try diffrent foods and meet new people! The chances are endless! You can see things you never seen, and learn things you never known. This can all happen if you join Seagoing Cowboys.
Like I said "Beside's helping people, I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and Chine." You can have fun and help others at the same time. People in other countrys need our help. That's why we need more people. That's why we need people like you! | 12
|
c6490ff | Driverless cars are the future. Sergey Brin is the creator of the Google Cars. He believes such cars would fundamentally change the world. They are made to take people to where they need to go without them really even having to drive. The only time the person will need to take over is when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents. These cars would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus.
My opinion on these new inventions is that I do not think these cars are needed and i don't think that they will be the next big thing. A lot can go wrong with them. The car could malfunction and possibly get a lot of people into a crash. The article says that the car is made so it automatically sensors the driver when they are needed. They are supposed to have seats that vibrate to notifty the driver, but what if the driver doesn't notice it and they end up crashing and hurt a lot of people.
The cars are also supposed to have cameras to watch that the drivers are remaining focused on the road. While the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver. But what if the camera breaks and it takes a while for the owner to get it fixed. Then how is the car going to watch the person? Plus by having these it just makes us all a little more lazier. Driving can be fun and nice to know how to do. I myself, enjoy driving. I personally think it's fun.
Our lives are being taken over by technology. Everyone now a days depends on it. They're lost without it. By making cars that will drive us around, without us barely even having to drive it is stupid. They're also most likely going to be outragiously expensive. The name also does not make sense. Why call it "driverless" cars, if people are still going to have to drive it.
The article states, "If technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault--the driver or the manufacturer?" In my opinion, it all just depends on the situation. If the car itself has an issue then its going to be the manufacturer's fault, but if the person just wasn't paying attention, then it is the driver's fault. To come to a conclusion, driverless cars are not worth all the hard work and time. They may be in style for a few months, but then i think people will get tired of them and just go back to their regular car. | 34
|
3ebc31e | Cars are the main cause of pollution in major cities. Cities are covered in smog from gas emmisions from a car's exhaust. This is not good for the environment. Something must be done about this. If the usage of cars is cut down, then the amout of pollution in the air will be less. A less usage of cars allows people to have a clean community and helps the environment.
In Germany, there is a small community that is completely car-free. This community, Vauban, has about 5,500 residents, and not a single one of them use a car. This community is very clean and all of the people that live there are happy. Just think, what if every family in Vauban had a car? It would completely change this happy, clean community. There would be a lot more pollution and more stressful citizens. More and more small towns are beginning to ditch the cars for walking and taking a bicycle.
More cities are starting to have car-free days to help with the pollution problems that are caused by automobile engines. Examples of these cities include Paris, France and Bogota, Colombia. Pollution is starting to be a big problem in big cities like these, so they have decided to take action. Pollution is destroying our atmosphere. The gases that are released from the exhaust of car engines slowly deteriorates the layer of atmosphere of our world. If cars begin to be frequently used like they are now, the atmosphere may become damaged beyond the condition for being fixed. Earth only has one atmosphere, so once it's gone, we can't get it back.
People in the United States are beginning to cut back on the number of people who drive cars. The U.S. has been one of the leading country with the number of people who drive cars and the amount of pollution, but people have been taking action and going for a greener alternative. In the fourth passage it says, "A study last year found that driving by young people decreased 23 percent between 2001 and 2009." A lot of people between 16 and 39 do not even have a driver's license. People are starting to take public transportation and carpool instead of driving their vehicles from point A to point B. With more and more people doing this, it just lessens the amount of emmisions in the atmsophere more. America has passed it prime for driving because of the more and more who are taking action in making a change in the health of our world.
In conclusion, there are many reasons that we should start to lessen the amount of people driving on the road. It just causes pollution and makes the health and well- being of others and the earth worse. People are already beginning to make a change, but we need more than there is to make a difference. | 34
|
fb868be | When scientists first saw the face, they figured it was just another Martian mesa. Martian mesa's are pretty common in Cydonia, and this is the only one that had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. After NASA looked at it for a few days they let it out to the public. Scientists believed it was a huge rock formation that just "looks" like a human head. Then, they said that the shadows made it look like it had a nose, eyes, and mouth.
The first web site the Face ever appeared on was JPL web site. It showed a natural land form, and no alien monument after all. However, Alien Researchers believe that since MGS had to peer through whispy clouds to see the face that alien markings were hidden by the haze. Because of this, Mission controllers took a second trip. They took better pictures than the Viking photo and had great results.
Garvin was the Mission Controller in command and he points out that that things in a digital come up three times bigger than the original image. He also says, "So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what the were!" He tells us that this is rule of thumb and that he knows what he is doing because this is his job. From this point it would crealy state, comming for Mission Control, that it is in fact not an alien siting. In conclusion, "What the picture actually shows in the Martian equivalent of a butt or masa-landforms common around the American West." | 12
|
5d7a8a8 | In the world today many products that companies come out with includes innovative technology that enters the homes of millions world wide. It is technology that in the past, was only imagined on tv shows and movie screens. Driveless cars are one of those technologies that has been imagined time and time again but it has yet to actually become a fully functioning reality. Although, it should be and with companies like google and tesla already at the forefornt of this innovation it dosen't seem too far fetched that in a few years
people might just see one of those driveerless cars on the road and It would probaly benefit us as a society.
The idea of a driveless car isn't new
in fact " In the lat 1950s, general motors created a concept car" for it. and even though it wasn't really the car that was smarter and more of the roads the idea was still there. The only diffrences between the idea of driverless cars then and now is that the cars weren't nearly as smart as cars now in which many have computers and then they most likely weren't thinking about the idea of climate change which now is a huge consideration. Not only would driverless cars make it easier on the driver, but
it would also make it easier on the enviorment. because the car would most likely need massive amounts of energy they would also most likely be complety electric or a hybrid saving the money of the driver since they aren't spending it on gas and cutting back fuel emmisions.
Many critics of the car would say it is unsafe to have on the road because the computer wouldn't be able to understand the traffic laws however " Presently, traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver" but If the laws were altered to include driverless cars then the only issue would be faliure of the technology. However, if the cars are designed properly that would most likely be at or below the rate of human error. which means it could prevent major accidents from happening speciffically those occuring due to drunk driving.
There is still a lot of time before driverless cars are realesed and is considered safe to use in america. But the idea of the future where the driver isn't actually required to do anything is excitiing. It will one less inovation that is only imagined and not reality. | 34
|
7d4b44d | sciencetists say its worth to dicover even more about Venus becuase i could maintane humans in the future. but also give use resources to support human life
Bad things why we shoun't go to Venus is sciencetists say its not worth to take risk becuase it could are human nature becuase of the tempetuares in Venus up to 170 that could cause harms for many humans the are alergic to the sun and it will take years for us humans to travel to Venus since it the second plant on the solar system ti could take us years to be able to reach are piont. also machines can't be able to survive in Venus becuase the heatness and the weather on the planet. it also have a lot of challenges for scientists becuase they still hanve't discover the whole plant on Venus it could still have dangroues things before we go and live in it.
NASA is working on the machines so that we could be able to see what Venus still has for us humns. can it support humans or not.
REasons we we should go so that if earth gets destoyed we could go to a different plant and maintene human life again. it could guve us more human resouces for oilgas and many more. but also Venus has a value for the solar system | 12
|
a8621aa | In Nick D'Alto's article, "Making Mona Lisa Smile," he talks about a new technology called the Facial Coding System that enables computers to identify all kinds of human's emotions. This could be a very valuable tool for classrooms, but it also sounds scary that computers are consuming more and more of students' time. In some ways the technology to read a student's emotion can be very helpful, but there are also many cons to the technology, which should make so it should not be used outside of the classroom.
The Facial Acting Coding System is and will be helpful in the future to students' learning. While a student is using the computer it can tell if they are learning and concentrating or bored and tired. Also, if a student seems intrigued by a certain assingment or video, the computer can see that and produce more that are like it. Lastly, if a student is struggling, but he does not want to admit it the computer can see that and communicate with the teacher of the classroom.
Even though the computer is helpful, there are many possible problems. First of all, just like the article said, humans can already tell when other humans are happy, surprised, angry, discusted, scared, or sad. If we can already read human's emotions why do we need a computer to look at one another to read their emotions? Just by simply looking at a friend we can tell if they are having a good day or if they are struggling. We have lived without this technology for many years so why do we need it now? It seems like humans are only wasting their time trying to create new technology like this for example.
Students and their parents alike should fear these computers. If parents want time with their kids, and if they want to help with their kids emotions these computers will ruin the parent's chances. The Facial Action Coding System is helpful now, but in the future it may take away from family time, and the students might go to their computers for help instead of their parents. This system could create a disaster in the world if people do not go about it the right way. Finally, with these computers humans would not be able to hide any of their emotions. Some emotions are meant to be inside and stay that way. Not everyone needs to know all your deep dark secrets. Especially a computer system does not need to know your secrets.
The Facial Action Coding System could be used in many different ways. If the technology is not used right then the world could be changed for the worse, although if it is used only in the classroom (the right way) then it could be very helpful to students who struggle. Overall there are pros of the system, but we need to be cautious with the new technology and make sure that it is used in only beneficial ways. | 34
|
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
|
2565613 | Making Mona Lisa Smile
Mona Lisa is 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted and 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry. Mona Lisa is a Painting that is drawn by the use of color painting and other handful material, when humans are drawing with their hand and feelings it shows the facial expression and emoyion of the drawing. Technology cannot be used to express humans feelins or emotions, even with what is installed in it.
With the use of technology, the facial expression and emotion of Mona Lisa and even other drawing emotions and feelings cannot be expressed because technology has no feelings or emotions, also emtoins cannot be calculated, "Hold on! Can we actually "calculate" emotions-like math homework? And how can a computer recognize the subtle facial movements we humans use to express how we feel?".
Technology cannot express feelings to human, so it cannot be used to calculate human emotional expression.
In technology, the human muscles, 3-D computer model of the face and all major humans muscles are installed in the computer, "The process begins when the computer constructa 3-D computer model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. Movement of one or more muscles is called an action unit". Technology should not be use to paint or even draw because technology cannot express human feelings and behavior. The use of technology to read emotions expressions of student in the classroom is not valueable because technology can never calculate the feelings or expression of humans.
In conclusion to the use of technology to calculate humans emotional expression. Technology cannot calculate humans expressions because humans emotion and facial expression varies from time to time and based on what there are seeing and feeling at the moment, so technology cannot calculate human expressions. If technology can calculate humans feelings the our phone or other electronics devices should have been able to tell us where we want to go to at a particular moment, and be able to know when calls should come in or not. | 12
|
92d24d8 | Driverless cars are our future, whether we want them to be or not. Since the first inventions people have always been opposed to new things. Driverless cars should not be one of them. They should be excepted because well, they are a good idea.
Think about something machine made. Anything at all. If you have two of those, compare them. Are they identical? Let's be honest, machines are perfect in what they do. Unlike humans, machines can all be programed the same, and will each do the same thing just as well as any other one would. Humans, on the other hand, make mistakes. If all cars are programmed the same way, they would all drive and react to situations the same way. In other words, they could be programed to always follow the speed limit and other laws. Some people just don't care about that sort of thing. No one would get hurt, even if you spent the whole night drinking. The driverless cars today give the ones of the future a bad rep. Technology is quickly improving. If you think all the sensors and other gadgets on todays cars are cool, wait until todays brainiacs really get down to working on them. You have to remember though, humans do make mistakes. Malfunctions are likely to happen, but if they do, way less people would be getting hurt compared to today.
How many people die due to texting and driving every year? Driverless cars could stop that from happening. Ever again. All those crosses you may see on the side of the road are a sign to what could be avoided. Driverless cars could stop putting those up all together. The people involved in making todays driverless cars are already putting something together. While you're sitting in your car that's driving itself, you may get bored. Pop up entertainment systems are already under consideration. Though today the driver will be alerted to any hazard on the road, and the pop up would be put away, that would not be the case in the future. You could text away and the car could handle any situation the road throws at it. I do believe, however, that people should still learn how to drive. If the car does fail, and stop working, the person in the vehicle should be able to take control of it and get it off of the road.
People against this new innovation have good reasons as to why they are. I understand not being in control can worry many people, but driverless cars that work the way I explained are far from becoming a reality. The people of the future can slowly be weaned into this new car. To them, owning a car that drives itself will be no different then how we feel about our cars today. These cars are the future, a future in which accidents are a rarity and stupid people behind the wheel can't hurt anyone on the road anymore. So don't be afraid of this new idea, embrace it. Driverless cars, when completed and working to the best of their ability could save many lives, and lead the world to a new exciting future. | 34
|
3fe4901 | Even though driverless cars can solve many problems, they can also create many problems. Driverless cars can enhance the risk of accidents on the road and put other drivers on the road at risk for danger. They also rise the question of liability. Who is responable if there is an acciedent involving a driverless car? The creation of this car can also promote laziness.
Driverless cars can enhance the risk of accidents on the road and put other drivers on the road at risk for danger. Roads are already dangerous with human error that can lead to accidents, and sometimes death. By putting a car on the road that can drive by itself rise the danger rate. How can you insure safety for other drivers on the road? It reads in the text "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves" cars are machines and machines have malfunctions, so how can you trust a machine to have control of your life?
However, driverless cars also rise the question of liability. Who is responable there is an accident involving a driverless car? Who should we blame the car or the driver? "Most driving laws focus on keeping drivers, passengers, and pedestrains safe" if this is true driverless cars have no liability. Driverless cars open a window to endless amounts of questions, all of which needs to be answered before they are on the road.
Lastly, driverless cars also can promote laziness. Technology is a beautiful thing to have but it can also make us lazy. Technology such as cellular phones have become a dependent for many people. So adding driverless cars to the list of technology that make us move and be active is dangerous. Car driven by people allow them to interact with their surroundings, but driverless cars take away a lot of that interaction.
In conclusion, I do not support driverless cars because of many different reasons. One it has a safety risk for other drivers, two who is responable for a accident involving a driverless car, and finally it promotes human laziness. Until all of the logical concerns have been answered these cars should not be on the road. Driverless cars might be in the wave of the future but not until we are sure their are little to no health concerns. | 34
|
b87929d | The Electoral College has been a part of America since the beginning, but is it fair? Our country is a Democracy, which means " For the People" or " By the People". The Electoral College is not By the People. Yes, it has historcal value, but it no longer is what a Democracy is because of population changes and states being added to the country.
To begin with, Source 2 states " The Electoral College is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-take-all system in each state." There is a popularity vote and then the Electoral College vote, most citizens think that the popularity vote will win because that candidate is the person that the people chose. That is not the case. It just depends on basically how big your state is and how popular a candidate is in that state. The population is the biggest factor that the candidates think about because if they win that state they are closer to winning the election. There are people who want to abolish the Electoral College including past presidents Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter. It really just isn't fair to the people that who they vote for and who wins the popular vote may not have a chance to win because he/she did not get the Electoral College votes.
In addition, Source 3 states " The advocates of this position are correct in arguing that the Electoral College method is not democratic in a modern sense...it is the electors who vote for a president, no the people." When you vote in your state you are actually voting for an elector and not the presidential candidate. In 2000 the popular vote was higher for Al Gore than it was for George Bush, but Bush won the presidential election because he had a higher number of electors in the electoral college. In a real democracy Gore would have won because of the fact he was more popular. The people want to vote directly for the candidate they want not for some person that has been trusted to vote for a party's nominee.
Finally, The Electoral College is kind of fair in a way because it is based off population in each state. There is also an equal number of electors. Source 1 states " The founding fathers established it (the electoral college) in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by popular vote of qualified citizens." I understand that it is a law set by the men who created our country and it worked back then. It just isn't working in present day.
In conclusion, The Electoral College was created by the founding fathers back when the U.S. was small and didn't have a huge population like we do today. It worked back then, but now there are 50 states and millions of people. They want to be heard. The popular vote would make more sense than having states with huge populations deciding the fate of the election, when it should by popularity of the candidate. We need to restore our democracy and have the election be By the People. | 45
|
f3ac428 | Mistaken for a star, the planet, Venus is the second planet from our sun and nearly Earth's twin sister. Look more closely, it has proven to be a very challenging place to study closely. Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents, because It is Earth's twin, life used to be on it, and it is making scientist curious and wanting to get on Venus.
It is said that the planet, Venus, is Earth's twin. Venus is the closest planet to Earth by denisty and size, it is occasionally the closest in distance too. The close planets, Venus, Earth, and Mars orbit the sun at different speeds. Earth is sometimes closer to Mars and sometimes closer to Venus. The Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like eripting volcaneos, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes just like Earth has.
The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and creaters. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration has one particularly compelling idea for sending humans to stufy Venus. Their possible solution to the hostole conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Our jet airplanes would travel at a higher altitude to fly over many stroms. 30-plus miles above the surface, the tempertures would still be really hot at around 170 degrees, but the air pressure would be close to the sea level on Eath. Radiation would not exceed Earth levels and Solar power would be plentiful. These are not easy condititons for a human but survivable.
Humans have sent countless spacecrafts to land on Venus, which none of them survived the landing for more than a few hours. No humans were ever aboard. Venus's has a thick atomosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets and there are clouds od highly corrosive sulfuri acid in the atmostphere. Venus has the hottest furface tempture of any planet in our solar system.
Dispite the dangers Earth's twin brings, Venus is still worth Exploring and having a chance to be explored. This planet has a lot of challenges but NASA is already finding a way past them, making it to where humanity still has a chance. | 23
|
99a0329 | The author supports the idea of studying venus with ahuge ammount of facts. like that venus use to be able to hold life like eartdid or that its super hot and too hot to put anything from earth on beacsue it will melt but personally i think that the author had no point in what he worte. he made it clear that no one can with stande 170 degree temperature and that no metal is gping to be able to withstand the heat either. so with that temerature no human life and no robot could go to venus. right? no. the author also made it clear that venus was like our twin and it use to have charestics like pur plant.
From the water covering the planet to the air. but now venus has a thick aptmosphere and we could never live on venus. that not the only reason though there is no water source its to hot and we couldnt breatth beacsue of how this the aptmosphereis in venus.
We nor no animal could withstand the heat on venus but the author argued that we could but in all reality we couldnt and it sint even a smart idea NASA is putting money into to something that wont worl and its pointless beacus eit 170 degrees and no one wants that. wed die. metal will melt and until we come up with non melting metal no one will live on venus | 12
|
6220638 | Luke's point of veiw to convince other people to participate in the Seagoing cowboys program is you get to travel in many places around the world and you also stay on the seas for a number of hours with your fellow peers.
Details to support my arugement is according to the story in paragraph 6 Travling the High Seas is says,"It took about 2 weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United States and a month to get to China". In paragraph one it states,"Luke couldn't say no. He knew it was an opportunity of a lifetime.
I fell my arguement fells right because Luke is saying that you should join because of the things they do and he is also trying to say that when they cross the Atlantic Ocean they discover new things. Also in paragraph 2 it says," that the second World War had ended in Europe,and many countries were leftr in ruins". So that ment they got wounded and hurt people to safety. They also got to go to New Orleans the day the Pacific War ended and they got their seaman's paperand boarded to the SS Charles W. Wooster,and headed to Greece. That agruement on what Luke's point of veiw that he is convincing other people to join in the Seagoing Cowboys program. | 12
|
6ccda33 | "Hmmmm, i think it would be great to have others in the Seagoing Cowboys program." Luke Bomberger is apart of the Seagoing Cowboys program and thinks it would be great if new faces would join the program as well. So Luke is thinking about how he'd get the message out to people so they could probably be in the program. ''I should talk to the others and see what they think." Luke said, so he spreads the word to the other guys and they all think it's a great idea. Luke was amazed everyone was wanting others to join the program also. All of a sudden luke thought to himself ''We'll be getting back on board in three more days. So he told the guys that they need to get the word out to as many people as they could instantainiously. So they thought of a plan then one of the guys blurted out and said, 'since were on land right now we could probably find a radio station around here." So the other guys gave him a high five and telling him that's an brilliant idea. So the guys took a map and started roaming around seeing if they could find a radio station. And about two hours later of searching they finally found a little radio station in the middle of no where. So Luke lead the the group of gentlemen in the little radio station and spoted an old man drinking coffe just sitting there. So as soon as Luke said 'Excuse me sir?.'' The old man jumped up instantainioulsy and said, 'AHHH! who are you and what do you want?". So all the gentlemen introduced theirselfs and told the old man how trhey needed to let others know about their program and how they needed his help. So the old man responded with, "What's in it for me?" the gentlemen thought for a moment and one said, 'Oh i know, if you let us use your thingy majigger here you can leave this boring job and come with us." So the old man thought for a moment and then said "Deal". So the old man turned on his machine to have all the guys on the radio then he counted down "3...2...1...and action." So Luke spoke first and said ''Gentlemen and gentlemen come one come all to be apart of the Seagoing Cowboys program." then he gave out all the infomation then in less in two minutes the radio station started to get dozens of phone calls and all the men that called were excepted and flew out to where all the other men were. Three day later it was time to take off and get ready to start sailing so Lucas did a head count. The program started out with 24 members but when Lucas was done counting the program had 148 members in all. Lucas was happy with the success and progress that was made, so everyone got settled in and started to sail. | 12
|
3e68222 | Did you know that the planet Venus is well known as a misleading planet and a very dangerous place in outer space. Here are three facts from the article that the author discuss. History of venus, misleading planet, beyond danger.
Venus is a very unique planet to study and the history why the planet is a very challeging place. Venus is very simple to see from the distant but safe vantage. It is also well known as Earth's "twin." Planet Venus is sometime called the "Evening star," it to be known one of the brightest points of light in the night sky. However Venus is actually a planet in our solar system in outer space it has proved that it is a very challenging place to examine more closely.
Venus is well known for its nickname "misleading." Each of the previous mission was unmanned, and for a very good purpose. In paragraph 2 it stated this "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." Due to the reason that Venus is sometime around the corner in terms of space human have sent numerous of spacecraft to land on this cloud draped world.
The planet Venus is a very dangerous place to live in or even to take a trip. Venus temperature is beyond high pressure and heat although planet mars is to be known the closest planet to the sun but, a thick atmosphere of almost ninty seven carbon dioxide blankets Venus. It's even more challeging when the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet venus of the surface the average temperature is over eight hundred degree Fahrenheit. The greatest pressure of atmospheric is ninty times greater that what most people have experience on our planet.
In conclusion this essay has proven that planet Venus is a very beautiful planet to look at but, it is a beyond what a normal human can handle such as a high temperature, and a deadly it the deadliest place out of all of the solar system palnet. | 23
|
3ffd355 | It was an oppurtunity of a lifetime. There was so much to do, learn, and see. " When my draft board learned that I was on a cattle-boat trip, they told me to just keep doing that for my service." There are many wonderful benefits of participating in the Seagoing Cowboys program.
Everyone should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program. There is so much to see, and learn. A cattle-boat trip was an unbelievable oppurtunity for a small-town boy like me. I had the side benefits of seeing Europe and China, we also saw Acropolis in Venice, Italy, a city with street of water. I toured the an excavating castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Cnal on his way to China.
I could have possibly been drafted earlier then I was. "When my draft board learnd thta was on a cattle-boat trip, they told me to just keep doing what I was doing for my service. Many apposing sides may argue that joining the Seagoing Cowboys is a rediciolus, idea. I disagree when people say there is a danger of joing the Seagoing Cowboys.
To conclude there are sentimental memories in joining the Seagoing Cowboys,and many values. There are great lessons to learn things to see.
The oppurtunity is something you will not want to miss out on. The amazing feeling you get from joining is nothing that you will ever believe until you join.
There are many new friends, fun, enjoyable sights, and lessons to learn. | 23
|
5b1041d | The author supports this idea fairly well, giving an extreme amount of interest into the topic. He too is like any other human, curiosity driving him. Paragraph 8 states, "Striving to meet the chcallenege 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.", this being explained that human curiosity does drive people to do things. The mind is a very confusing thing for humans, that we still to this day doesn't understand. They have thought of many solutions for getting on the surface to mars, whether it being vehicles flying 30+ miles above the surface to have a glance of what they're dealing with, or using certain materials to make a machine last longer on the surface to get the data they need. We can't stay there permenently to obtain data, but we can stay there for a slight bit, as Paragraph 5 says, "Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape", and as Paragraph 7 states, "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...". Though our human race hasn't even dented the knowledge of the world, our technology is advancing whether it's taking 20 years or 20 days. Soon enough, we could support civilization on Venus. | 12
|
9059dde | Would you ever want to go on a trip to Venus despite the dangers? The author tells us the temperature average is over 800 degrees fahrenheit and the atmospheric pressure over 90 times greater that what we are used to on earth! Venus has the hottest surface planet temperature of any planet despite Mercury being the closest to the sun. The author suggest that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it represents by telling us that NASA is working on approches to study venus without the dangers, and that NASA could allow scientist to "float above the fray."
NASA is working on approaches to study venus without the dangers. In "The Challenge of Exploring Mars" the author states, "These devices make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require electronics." The "Mechanical Computers" could be helpful when studying Venus because it wouldn't be as dangerous if an actual person would go to Venus. The author also states, "Systems that use mechanical parts can be made more resistant to pressure, heat, and other forces." This tells the readers that using the "Mechanical Computers" can restrict some of the dangers by using not technology but mechanical wise computers.
NASA could possibly work on a blimp- like vehicle hovering over 30 or so miles above the roiling Veusian landscape, states the author. The author states, "... a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. "Using this possible vehicle you could work on studying Venus but also eliminate the risks or dangers you could face in the temperature Venus has. In the passage the author also states, "At thirty plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees fahrenhit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on earth." The author is trying to tell the readers that it would be bad if you just went there without anything instead of easily hovering over venus without the dangers you could face.
Furthermore, the author suggests that studying venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it represnts by telling us that NASA is working on approaches to study Venus, and that NASA could allow scientist to float above to fray. Studying Venus would be something that hasn't been done in more than 3 decades and coming up with something that could avoid the Venus dangers would be a miracle. | 23
|
565993b | I strongly agree the auther did a great job , on supporting his idea on the suggesten of studing venus is worth a shot , despit the dangers it presents . the resaon i agree with him is becuse he has great supporting details .
The reason i think he did a good job supporting his claim is because not just did he tell us intersting facts but he also gave us a bit of back round like it's name and so forth . The most important infomashion i think the author gave was talking about the atmosphere ."A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide ." found in paragraph 3 . Also telling us about the planet surface temperature and going realy indep " on the planet's suface ,temperatures average over 800 degrees fahrenheit , and the atomospheric pressure is 90 times greater then what we experence on our own planet ". "beyond high pressure and heat " .
This is why i strongly support the auther on supporting his claim on the suggesten on the stupping venus will be a great idea anad also open up new doors . | 12
|
5fbfe66 | How do you think the Face was formed. There could be many reasons how the Face was formed. However I think that the Face was not formed by aliens. One reason is, is that they haven't prove that aliens are real yet. Also, that the day they took they picture they said that there was wispy clouds over it. Another reason is that it all happend because of science.
Mars is an odd planet, I've heard people call it the pizza planets because it was red, I think. That's not the point though, the point is, is that the planet has not proven that aliens live on that planet. The face had been thought it was created by aliens. NASA said that the Face was a "huge rock formation" showing the illusion of eyes, nose, and a mouth. There are more reasons why they face was Face was not formed by aliens.
Another reason is that the day they took the picture, there was wispy winds. In order to take a good picture you need to have good weather. The weather can effect the picture because if it's windy you need to make sure that everything is not blowing around. The wispy winds could have effected the picutre becuase the winds were blowing so the rocks, sand and everything else was blowing around. So, when Viking 1 captured that picture, it can everything else blowing with it. Wind storms happen on planets, I am not sure om which ones but i know they happen-just like how on the sun it doesn't have wind storms but has almosr like volcanic action on it with lave everywhere. There is one more other reason.
One more reason is that is just plain old science. Science occurs in a lot of discussing and working on the planet. When planning to send some sort of machine to a planet, you have to undertand the planet. In 1976 there wasn't the best technology at the time. They didn't know when a storm was gonna come or if they would have to send their machines threw a bunch of metors. When they sent out Viking 1 a win storm occured and the camera on Viking 1 couldn't focus right and that is why it looked like a face.
There are many more reasons why the Face was not formed but an aliens. Some are that it was that aliens have not been proven yet. Also, that there was wispy clounds. One more is that is was all science. Those are resons why that the Face was not formed by aliens. | 23
|
5c0dcf4 | In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile", it describes how this new technology called the "Facial Action Coding System" can identify human emotions and how it's is a very useful piece of technology. I have to agree, this new technology can be very helpful to many people.
For example, in paragraph six line six to eight it says "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". This not only can know how students are feeling about a certain lesson or problem in class, but can also ajust it's way of learning to a way that is best understandable for the students. Once sadisfied, and the computer reads that the student is "happy" with it, they'll finally be able to learn more and get a lot of their work done. Not only is this a really spectacular piece of technology, but a very useful one at that.
Reads a persons emotions, modified lessons to fit a student's understanding; once satisfied or "feeling happy" with it, a student can then work easier along with getting a lot more work done. I mean, does this not sound very useful and benificial to many people, to many students. This new piece of technology is going to help many students, and I for one would love to use the "Facial Action Coding System". | 12
|
728ed08 | In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming," i think its not good to have a tv in the car because its a distraction to the driver. If you have kids they might be laughing, screaming and doing other stuff that can distract you when driving. It is helpful for the car to be able to drive while the parent is taking care of there kids. It's okay to have Google maps and stuff like that to help you out.
Sensors are good because they could help you out when your not paying attention or when something is coming and you dont see it coming. They can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine which can allow the car to slow down quickly.
BMW announced the development of Traffic Jam Assistant the car can handle functions at speeds up to 25 mph, but special touch sensors make sure the friver keeps hold of the wheel. None of the cars developed so far are completely driverless, they can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but they are desighned to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills.
Some manufactures hope to do that by bringing in-car entertainment and information systems that use heads up displays. Which can be turned off instantly when the driver needs to take over. In this way, the in-car system is acutally a safety feature.
Driving laws are focus on keeping the driver, passengers, and pedestrians safe. If we have this then, i think that it will help us out. The reason for this is because we wouldnt be focused on reading our texts, or anything like that. We know that our car can drive on its own.
I think it would be smart to have this in our car. It would help us out in the long run. It would keep the other drivers safe if we didnt have to worry so much about everything. | 23
|
fcefbf5 | Not many can imagine life without a car. Yet despite how essential these machines may seem to our daily routines, the modern-day automobile is in fact another redundant aspect in our pursuit of more efficent transportation. The fact and concept of pollution comes into play.
On a sunny day in the streets of Paris the sky runs a depressing gray, and it feels difficult to breath. Paris is known for its near-record pollution, prompting officals to enforce a temporary cesation in the use of automobiles. As Robert Duffer States in the article "Paris Bans Driving Due to Smog": "On Monday motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine ($31)," this procedure has been followed to the letter and approximately 4,000 drivers were fined in total. Subsequently, the net amount of smog has been drasticaly reduced over time, with ignorant blames on diesel as a correlatin to France's favor of it over gasoline which completely ignored the other constituant:the effect cold and warm wheather itself had in the proces of containing CO2 (Carbon Dioxide) and other pollutants in the lower layers of the atmosphere. However, the desired levels of pollution have been reached, and the ban on driving lifted.
With the concept of pollution among others, the future of the automobile as we know it is being threatened with extinction. Perhaps one day when China completes its plans for an intercontinental Mag-Lev transportation system and when Virgin Mobile perfects its new scram-jet design in tandem with Lockheed-Martin as well as Elon Musks countless innovations in electrical engineerng, the human race will look upon this era with pride to know what they've come from and what they've achieved thus far. | 23
|
d7754e9 | Using technology to read a persons facial emotional expressions is really not a bad idea, just think about a computer being able to tell if your happy,sad,mad ect .In paragraph 1 it states all the emotions that the mona lisa had in the panting when most of the world had thought of her having one emotion,now to think that she acually had almost 5 different things going on in her face in the panting.
"most human communtion is nonverbal including emotional communcaton " this is really cool becasue people in this time don't do a lot of talking,they most likeing have there face in a screen someone and if Dr. Hang decides to be more open with other companies like apple of samsang that i would be easier to tell what someone means though text or picture,becasue it really hard to decifier what someone truely means mean there not pyhsical there with you. Paragraph 8 says that this computer can tell if your putting on a true or false smile in other words if your telling a lie or not.
In conclusion Dr. hang has a truely great thing going on right now this could be a future in the next couple of years if technology it's any better that in is right now, small things like Dr. hang idea or invention can lead this world bigger and better. | 12
|
bd04e2e | What are the advantages of limitng car usage? Well ther are some causes of the use of car which is polllution. like it says in the passage, "Its a good opportunity to take away stress and lower pollution" (source 3). Pollution can be really bad for the people. " The goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. Violateros wil be fine twenty five dollars" (source 3). In bogota they have had a change with limiting car usage. "It was third straight year cars have been banned with only buses and taxis permitted for the Day Without Cars in this capital city of seven million" (source 3).
People have been affected by this cause. Bogota has inpired many others to do this. Two Colombian cities has joine with them , Cali, and Valledupar. Bogota are "generating a revolutionary change, and this is crossing borders" (source 3). Bogota just had one thing on their mind, which was to reduce smog. Ther are many other places with this king of cause. Paris has been the one most affected. " Paris typically has more smog than other European capitals" ( source 2). There has been four thousand drivers fined, and twenty seven had their car impounded for their reaction of the fine. " After days of near-recorded pollution, Paris enfourced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city" (source 2).
The United States has been doing some reserach and turns out that, " Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by. The United States has been " one of the worls prime car cultures" (source 4). The united states have had the highest population growth of mile driven in two-thousand five and dropped down afterwards. The miles driven was nine percent lower than it was in two-thousand five. Car pullution has been affectig people. This is why they are reducing car usage. Its for their own good.
Pollution has been stopped with limiting the use of cars. People have been riding bikes, walking, etc, to places they have to go. They have sacrificed the use of car but has advanced their lifestyle. The have made a commitment to decrease the population of pollution. There have been talks to start inventing plug-in-cars, hybrids, and car carrying three or more passengers. There are going to find a way to stop pollution.
In Conclusion, pollution has been affecting people lives. They have done everything possible to stop pollution. There are limiting the use of cars, they are begining to transport themselves by bikes, or they walkThere goals are to " promote alternative transportation and reduce smog" (source 3). "The turnout was large despite the grey clouds that dumped occasional rain showers on Bogota" (source 3). All that smog goes up into the air and affects us. The limited car usage is really a good thing for your health and later on in your life. | 23
|
59e5c22 | Ford, Volkswagen, Kia, and Chevy's... while these car brands may have been a massive part of the American culture, its significance in our lives may be declining. According to recent studies and stories from around the world, car transportation popularity is decreasing dramatically. Some advantages of limiting car usage that the United States will benifit from include: reducing greenhouse gases emitted making for a better environment, and less usage of cars can lower stress and is safer.
By limiting the amount that the citizens of the United States operate their vehicles, the condition of our environment's atmosphere will improve. As stated in Source 1, "and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States." This passage is referring to the amount of greenhouse gas emitted here in America because of passenger cars. By not using car and taking advantage of other methods of transportation such as buses, walking, and riding a bike that number can be reduced significantly. In the United States we are also learning from mistakes made by other countries and cities. "After days of near-record pollution," Source 2 says, "Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city." A lesson can be taken from Paris of how we do not want to end up in a situation like that. By limiting our driving currently we can avoid having to take major steps to clean and clear our environment. "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," a sociologist predicts in Source 4. Environmental advantages of reducing greenhouse gas is a major way we can benifit from limiting car usage.
A decent amount of stress comes with owning and operating a motorized vehicle. You are constantly worrying about if you will be late, or if you have enough gas to make it from point A to point B. Children are another concern and trying to keep them safe around roads and driving by themselves. Limiting the use of cars can create a less stressful, and safer society. In Source 3 it explains that, "Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks; rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic; and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up." Lowering the use of cars can make life a little less busy because it is one thing less that you have to worry about throughout your day. Heidrun Walter said, in Source 1, "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way." Reducing the usage of cars can promote a less stressful and safer lifestyle here in the United States.
Although the use of cars may be convienent, the benifits of limiting the usage may be beginning to outweight the inconviences. Between reducing the greenhouse gas creating a cleaner environment as well as lessening stress and making the roads safer, the advantages of limiting car usage in the United States are major. | 34
|
cece966 | Dear Senator,
Thank you for taking the time to read my letter. I would like to bring something to your attention that has been on my mind recently. I think the electoral college is important in picking our presidents and i think that it needs to stay apart of our voting process. The Electoral college is in our history and the founding fathers didnt put it there to just be removed. The Electoral College needs to stay apart of our voting process beause we always have the certainty of outcomes, Everyones presidents, and it avoids run off elections.
With an Electoral College we' ll always have the certainty of outcomes because the winning canidate's share of electoral college invaribly exceeds his share of the popular vote. Also its highly unlikely for a tie in the electoral college unlike in popularity.
In the Electoral College everyones president. This is such a big part because the electoral college requires a presidental candidate to have trans-regional appeal. No region has enough electoral votes to elect a president. A candidate with only regional appeal is unlikely to be a successful president.
The Electoral College avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast. There is pressure for run-off elections when no candidate wins a majority of the votes cast; that pressure, which would greatly complicate the presidental election process, is reduced by the electoral college.
In conclusion, the electoral college is a great thing for the united states and states. its very much what our founding fathers intendid it to be and it should never be take away. Its neccessary and needed in voting for presidents. | 23
|
3147bb8 | Through out the day emotions can change quickly just by looking at something or talking to someone. People emotions are an everyday thing,and software is be creating to were the technology can read a person a emotion. Not a lot of people like to describe how they feel, and no one can really understand how they feel if they show no emotion. Now wait what if the computer can still decet emotion without needing to take a survey or as questions, just by using muscle recantion.The use of technology to read emotional expressions of students in the classroom is valuable because the technology is more effiecnt and can detect a slight muscle in the face, also can tell if the emotion is a lie,and lastly the technology can later help schools figure out what a studnet would rather like to read or how the would to learn it by using emtotion decter.
The technology is valuable because it can detect the slightest muslce in the face. Studies say that if a person makes a slight change in the face the computer can read the face and show how the student feels about the lesson him or her are learning. Also the technology is useful to figure that the muscle that is being used to give off the emotion can later help other understand the person better and knows what will satsify them or not. In paragraph five it says,"in fact, we humans pefrom this same impressive "calculation" every day. For instance, you can probably tell how friend is feeling by simpliy looking at on her face."
Another reason is that the technology is effienct and does work properly. The technology can dectect if the emtion is trying to be created rather than true.In the text paragraph eight it says,"but in a false smile,the mouth is streched sideways using the zygomatic major and a different muscle,the risorius. This saying that in are we use differnet mucles to make different faces. Just slightly is the face is changed then the technology can detect wether or not if the face is false or true.
Lastly,it would be valuable for students in the classroom because can dectect how the student fills about a certain lesson or objective. The technology the can tell the teacher how the student is feeling during the assignment or passage being read. Then give them other options to were they can feel more engertic about the lesson.In pargraph six it says,"A classroom computer could recognize when a student is confused or bored, then it could modify the lesson, like an effective instructor.This evidence helps explain how that a computer can change how a student will about school and make it more attentive and to follow along more instead being bored and confused.
In conclusin,technology is valuable to help read and understand students emotions. The technology would read the muscles to help getting understanding of how the studnets feels. Then can tell if the emotion is being created and not a true emotion. Lastly, could help to teachers get understanding of what the studnet would prefer rather than just giving them boring and confused passages the studnet does not understand. That's how technology could further work and help schools with a better learning effecient. | 34
|
e036358 | Advantages of limiting car usage:
Many countries are limiting car usage for the poeple and the enivornment. The is a great way to start fresh for our enivornment and our lives. People can breath better, more plants can grow thanks to decreasing of cars and much more. Countries, for intsance Germany, France and the United states are planning to become "car free", and this movement is called for "smart Planning". Also a clear passage for people can ride thier bikes, taking a walk, etc. Another thing s less spending on gas and money to buy cars, and less stress and more safety for everyone. This may end our car culture, but this is for the better for us, and everyone else in this planet. People can spend moe times outdoors and get fit ( of course since banning cars, which means we have to walk or ride a bike to go a store) instead of sticking a car to drive. Limiting car usage is a great way for the people and the environment.
First, In Vauban, Germany, Residents of their community are surbans pioneers, because they have given up their cars. Vaban's streets are completely "car free", expect the main thoruoghfare, where the tram to downtown Freiburg and a few streets on one edge of the community. Vabuan's families don't own cars, and 57 percent sold their car to move there. Heidrun Walter, media trainer who is also a mother of two childern has said that when she had a car, she was always tense, now she happier this way, because she can walked to verdant streets where the swish of bikes and the chatter of wandering childern drown out the distant motor. Also this drastically reduce greenhouse gas. Passenger cars are responible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas in Europe and up to 50 percent in United States. United states are promoting "car reduced" communites as well to do the same to get better atmosphere.
Second, In paris, they have also enforced a partical driving ban to clear the air of the global city. In France, cold nights and warm days are caused by the warmer layers of air to trap car emissions. Diesel fuel are to blamed, because France has a tax policy that favor diesel over gasonline, which made up to 67 percent of the vehicles in France comparing to 53.3 percent avaerage of diesel enines in the rest of the Western Europe,Acoording to Reuters. The smog cleared enough Monday for the ruling French party to the ban for odd- numbered plates in Tuesday. By banning the car for the enivornment, this helps for fixing the climate changes and clear skies.
Third, In Bogota Columbia, they are doing a program to spread the world to other countries, millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated or took bues to work during a carefree day yesterday, leaving the streets of thier capital city to devoid of traffic jams. This been striaght third year cars have banned with only buses and taxis perimitted for the day without cars in the capital city of 7 million. Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks, rush hours restrictions have dramatically cut wonderfully, and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up.
Last, President obama's goals is to curl the United Staes' greenhouse gas emissions. Recent studies shows that Americans are buying fewer cars, drving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by. If the pattern persists and many sociologists believe it will, it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the environment, since transportions is the secong largest source of America's emissions. They also believe to improve safety for others since hoew in the America, car accidents is a biggest issues for the people in United States. This can also help to fix tracffics and clearing up the air. Now, American's love affair with its vechicles seems cooling, so it the government can focus to improve the enivornment thet are living in.
Conclusion ,Limiting car is a great way for everyone and the enivorment. People can now get less sick for the gas, and plants can grow more. Clearer roads to make smooth sidewalks for people to ride their bikes , walking and much more. Lot moe safety for people, because of banning of cars. clear airs to breath and people can enjoy their lives, stress free since the don't have to pay gas, or car in general. People can be happy again, when cars usage are limiting. | 12
|
bf9407b | "The Face of Mars" true or not? "The Face of Mars" is no face at all. Even though with the low resoution, it looks like an Egyptian pharaoh, it just rocks and lava. There are so many reason why its not. Just read on and you will find out why I think this way.
"The Face of Mars", all it is is a martian mesa. these are very common around cydonia. All that this one had was a weird shadowing effect. Our eyes can change to what we know son that is make sense, that why everyone saw a face we also put what we know to something we have no clue on if it help explain it.
The face is just a normal landform. This "Face of Mars" is just like landforms on earth. Some may just look like common things we see everyday. you can't just assume that since it look like someone made that it couldn't be is an natural made landform.
The picture of "The Face of Mars" everyone says looks like a face is such a low resoution it's only 43 meters per pixel. The more resent picture is 1.56 meters per pixel. With the 1.56 meters per pixel you can see more of what's on the surface compared to the 43 meters per pixel.
From the low resoultion to it just a normal landform. From the fact that it looks like other landforms when in a better picture to there's not enough information for it being a alien made object. Theres so many reasons why this not anything more. | 23
|
fb89c7e | The technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable because it can do a lot more than just read emotions to us now. It can help us understand each other, help us answer questions we didn't have the power to answer, and help us become closer as a species. The human emotion is very hard to understand, but once you do your life can become a whole lot easier.
First I think that the technology is valuable because expressions are one of the keys of understand ourselves and each other. In the artical is states, "The facial expressions for each emotion are universal," observes Dr. Huang, "even though individuals often show varying degrees of expression." I think expressions are a way to become a sentiant being to.
I also think its valubal because their are still lots of questons to be answered but can t because the lack of technology but most of it can be answered by just using this. In the text it states, "She's 83 percent happy, 9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, and 2 percent angry." all of the words said in the text were all just based af a 2D photo think what we can do with a photo that's already 3 dimensinal.
Finaly I think that as a spices that amotions sre one of the thing that can hold us back or bring us forward in the future but that just a hypothosis of what i think. In the text it states, "Accoding to the facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, moving you facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them." Emotions are one of the keys to our future and it's to early to tell but hopefully it will be special.
The human emotion is very hard to understand, but with every thing that is said in the artical you can only hope the computer really becomes something special for all of us to observe. | 23
|
78399a9 | you should join the ''Seagoing Cowboys Program''. You should join the program because it is a wonderful opertunity to see some amazing sites, interact with a lot of animals, and have a lot of fun during free time.
One reason you should join the ''Seagoing Cowboys Program'' is because all of the amazing sites. When I was part of the ''Seagoing Cowboys Program'' I had the opertunity to see a lot of amazing sites. I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and China. But seeing the Acropolis in Greece was special,. So was taking a gondola ride in Venice, Italy, a city with streets of water. I also toured an excavated castle in Crete and marveled at the Panama Canal on my way to China.
Another reason you should join the ''Seagoing Cowboys Program'' is because all of the great times we have during free time on the boat. There is a lot of free time on board exspecially during the return trips after the animals have been unloaded. We played baseball and volleyball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed. Table-tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, and games also helped pass the time.
You also get to interact with a lot of animals. While you are sailing It takes about two weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United States and a month to get to China. Caring for the animals during the crossings keeps you busy. They have to be fed and watered two or three times a day. Bales of hay and bags of oats had to be pulled up from the lower holds of the ship. Stalls have to be cleaned. Although it is a lot of work, when you are doing these things with the animals it forms a bond between you and the animal.
There are some reasons why you should join the ''Seagoing cowboys Program''. I hope you will take the oppertunity to atleast look into the ''Seagoing Cowboys Program''. | 23
|
52fe408 | The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger it presents because they have tried to explore Venus for many years and they can't succed because only they can stay there for a couple of hours before they can't be out on venus anymore however they do have a nickname for Venus it is called the "Evening Star" and why they named it that because it is one of the brightest point of light in the night sky but they said that nickname was misleading because Venus was a actual planet in our solar sytem and Venus was simple to see from a distance but it is a safe vantage point from it said that it was proven a very challenging palce to examine more closely but they often reffered Venus as earths twin because Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size and it is occasionally the closest in distance too. But 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 it will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. And 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. But the reason why Venus is not good to explore because almost 97% of carbon dioxide blankets is covered all over Venus and on the planets surface it is about 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. | 01
|
b8179cf | The universe is a weird place. It is filled with places no one fully understands. Exploring those places that people do not fully understand is important. The author support the idea of studying Venus well.
The author gives good reasons by talking about what we could gain. In the text the author writes, "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". This sentence from the article helps support the claim by telling us we would gain insight in the planet. The sentence also helps support the claim by telling us the exploration of Veus would also make us more curious about space which will help with exploring other planets.
The author gives us information that we have already learned about Venus. In the text the author writes, "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth". This sentence from the article helps support the claim by telling us information to help support why we should explore. The sentence also helps support the claim by telling that the planet could have been like earth a long time ago which shows it might be habitable if we can learn to control the dangers.
The positives outweigh the negatives. In the the text the author writes, "If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface". This sentence helps support the claim by saying if Venus is so bad why are we trying to find ways to explore it. The sentence also helps support the claim by showing that there is a reason to explore Venus.
The idea of studying Venus was well supported by the author. Exploring those places that people do not fully understand is important. It is filled with places no one fully understands. The universe is a weird place. | 34
|
b02736f | Many people believe that owning and using a car or other motorized vehicles is an advantage. But is it really? Citizens might be able to get somewhere faster or not have to exert the energy to get there. But is it worth polluting the air, taking up all that space and creating traffic and frustrated citizens, and creating the mindset of a lazy, human being? Maybe instead of spending money on a car, citizens wouldn't be in as much debt, some kids might have college already paid for, and some citizens have their housing paid for. Therefor, this is making happier, stress-free, citizens.
The pollution of the air is a major arguement for people who support the non-usage of cars or other motorized vehicles. In Source 1: In Germany Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars, Elisabeth Rosenthal claims that motorized vehicles play a major part in the pollution of the air. Rosenthal says that Europe is responsible 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, and the United States is resposible for up to 50 percent.
Most of the time, traffic causes a driver to be frustrated. What causes traffic? Vehicles. So why does everybody drive them? In small, well-populated suburbs, traffic is a major issue. With the dense population and the majority of those citizens driving vehicles, traffic is very easily created. Thus, making more citizens frustrated and creating road rage. Road rage also causes more accidents which causes more deaths. Making driving, a dangerous thing. Although, citizens still drive motorized vehicles. Most of the time it is to get to a certain place in a short amount of time, but if a destination is closer than one mile, there is no excuse to use a vehicle to get there. But most citizens do. This creates a lazy mind set.
The average cost of a brand new car is roughly $30,000. If citizens avoid buying a car, it would be a great benifit for them. $30,000 can payoff college, or help with bills or debt, or payoff housing. With more money, this creates happier, and less stressed citizens.
The creation of "car dues", and "car-free days" could make a huge difference in the environment, economy, saftey, traffic, and even the health and stress of a citizen. Although most people still believe that having a car is an advantage, it can be. But not having a car or not using a car as much is a much greater advantage. Not just to an individual, but to society as a whole. | 34
|
d636677 | I do not agree with driverless cars. I think robots are too dangerous and could kill us if they become intelligent enough. Cars cant be replaced. not within the next hundred years or anytime soon. The roads are better controlled by humans, and it would cost us a ton of money to make and use all the proper equipment.
One of the major reasons I don't agree with driverless cars is the cost of it all. I will quote the article, "These smart-roas systems works surprisingly well, but they required massive upgrades to existing roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical. This would put us in debt even more and will ultimately be too risky to even do. This should remain what it is on television, a sci/fi mystery.
Another reason I disagree with driverless cars is its good for us to drive. It's stimulating for your brain as you develop more skill in driving. It would be one more thing we didn't have to worry about. It would make us lazy.
Thirdly, it's simply too dangerous. What if the human fell asleep in places where the car couldn't drive itself? If the technology fails and the human is injured, who could take the fault? The driver, or the manufacturer? In most states it is illegal to even test this sort of technology for a reason.
In conclusion, driverless cars are unsafe, too dangerous, and could lead to the dumbnation of humankind. I do not agree with driverless cars and I think they should leave the roads for the humans to secure. Robots are unpredictable. | 23
|
41dfd07 | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it present because the planet is like Earth's twin. According to the article Venus is the second planet from the sun, it's a very challenging place to examine, and humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this planet. Every mission was ummanned, and for a good reason because no spacecraft survived the landing for mroe than a few hours. Although, with all the challenges, scientists are still continuing to study the planet.
Venus has a thick atmostphere of 97 percent carbon dioxide. It is even more challenging because the clouds are highly corrosive sulfuric acid. The planet surface's temperatures average over 800 degree Fahrenheit, and the atmoshperic pressure is 90 times greater than what is on Earth. The conditions there is very extreme, for example, the planet is covered with oceans, it can crush a submarine when is dived into the deepest parts of the ocean. Even metals can be liquefied.
Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it is very Earth-like. Humans believe that it was once coverd largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth. Today, Venus still has features that are like Earth. It has valleys, mountains, and craters. Someday, Venus could be opened as an option for a planetary visit but it is crucial due to the long time frame of space travel.
NASA has one idea of how we could send humans to study Venus. According to article, NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Just like jet airplanes traveling higher altitudes to fly over storms. A vehicle hovering over venus would avoid the harsh contact with the ground's conditions. The article states that, solar power there would be plentiful, and the radiation would not exceed Earth levels. The condition is not easy, but the planet is surivivable for humans.
In conclusion, Venus is a survivable planet for humans because it has many Earth-like features. Due to the ground condition, NASA has came up with the idea of hovering over the surface to aviod any contacts with the toxic groud. The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit, which most will agree with because it is proven that Venus is a survivable planet. It may have many dangerous situations, but luckly, we have scientists who studies things like this to make it possible for humans to go through each danger we might encounter, if we were to one day live on the planet. | 23
|
ccb13fd | There isn't any aliens on the surface of mars at all but rather what you think is a fact. If aliens made this object or face than why does it look like the other pictures but as a landform or other type of thing. So let's break it down to why aliens didn't make this but is rather a landform or a sandstorm made this.
So first off let's start with the pictues seen above in the passage. The passage shows 3 pictures one in 1978 which does look like a face in a way, 1998 still looks a face however whe see more landform features making it seem like a hill or a nose. If your still convice that the aliens made then jump to 2001 and we cracks going over some kind of plateau and if we squint it does look like a face but still looks can be decieving.
Now if your truly convince that aliens still made this then let say something else. In paragraph 12 this was said, "The picture actually is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West." This being said this means that just like on Earth there are landforms almost like the Martian face.
Lasly, if you think the pictures captured it wrong and should have more evidence then let's get a little science in this. In the paragraph the face from far away still does look like it however things like this is cause by sandstorms which sweeps up dust or makes in a way new landforms. The dust cause by this can even devour even one of our latest spaces suits and wait for it... land.
So all this being said means that this was cause by erosion, sandstorms, or just a regular landform. So what you thought was aliens trying to get some attention is just a peace of museum or map of a landform. So next if you want to think that aliens made something, remeber that you need more proof than just something that looks like a face or something. If we stll have to go on about this then we have some more talking and the next planet to be put in the conversation is Venus and more of Earth. | 23
|
e4ca453 | What is the face on Mars? This is a question many asked themselves when the face was first discovered by the Viking 1 in 1976. Some believed it was proof that there is or was life on Mars, while others believed it was exactly what it is acutally a natural landform. Similar to the ones that form commonly in the American West such as a mesa or butte. These are the facts that cemented NASA's belief that this wasn't some alien made landfrom but rather a naturally occuring one.
Althrough few scientist believed that the face like formation was an alien artifact it still became a priority of ours at NASA to get a better quality photograph, so we could prove wether it was a natural landform or man made by unknown martians. On April 5, 1998 after years of speculation and conspriacys that it was bulit by martains and that we were trying to hide this "information", we finally got a shot at taking another photo of the face when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time. The picture taken with the Mars Global Surveyor was ten times sharper than the original VIking photos. These photo were what we needed to cement the fact that it was not an alien monument at all and instead a natural landfrom.
Not everyone was happy with this photo though. The Face on Mars is located in a very difficult place to photograph and when the MOC took the picture in 1998 there were wispy clouds you had to look past. The conspriators believed the alien marking maybe covered by said clouds. So alas we set out again to take another picture this time on April 8th, 2001 a cloudless summer day Cydonia. Malin's team snapped an incredible picture. What the picture showed to us was that the landfrom was the martian equivilent of a butte or mesa. Exactly what we belived it was... a natural landform.
This essay may or may not have made you believe me in what this landform acutally is, but what you believe it is doesn't not change the proof of the pictures. I do hope that this enlightened you as well as convince you of the landform being completely natural. I hope you enjoyed reading my argument if I could not convince you. thank you for taking your time to read this. | 34
|
8802ec4 | Somethings that I have observed is that when taking long trips by ground vehicles often times the driver will get tired of driving so they put their vehicle in cruise mode, now that is a nice aspect to the vehicle. Taking it one step further so that the vehicle can steer, accelerate, brake themsleves, and alert the driver to take over when nearby problems occur such as navigating through work zones and around accidents now that is even cooler. Like the article says the system has a warning system so that the seat vibrates or a light on the windshield flashes to warn of problems that are nearby. Now that sounds great but there should be even more safety like the article says installing a camera so that the vehicle is watching the driver while the driver watches the road. I am all for the driverless vehicle but some factors are necessary to take in terms of safety.
The vehicle may have a warning system which is great, but what if the warning system fails to warn. I get that there are complications that can occur such as the driver less system failing to work properly. When accidents do happen like this whose to blame is it the driver or the manufacturer. If say a mother has her children with her and the system fails and crashes does the driver have the ability to sue the manufacturer. Now if something like this does happen and it goes out to the public how many people are going to purchase the vehicle.
Like I said before I am for the driver less car, it sounds great, but people need to take in to consideration about safety. I have given my two cents about the driver less car it is time to make it work. | 12
|
a54fa0a | The "Face on Mars" isnt a alien artifact or building. It looked like a face because the photograph tooken in 1976 is outdated, and not as detaild as the on tooken in 2001.
In paragraph 2, the artical states: "Scientist figured it was just another Martian mesa, common on Cydonia, only this one had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh." giving you the idea that its not actually a face, and that its actually a Martian mesa.
In paragraph 7, Michael Malin and his MOC took sharper more precise than the original photos tooken before, proving its not a face its a Martian mesa. Also on paragraph 12, it says looks alot like a mesa, common in the American west.
The "Face on Mars" isnt alien artifact, its a Martian mesa. There isnt nothing to hide because there isnt anything living on mars.
The pictures tooken in 2001 show nothing of alien artifacts or buildings, its just a Martian mesa, That looked like a face in the picture from 1976, but it dont look like a face in the 2001 picture. | 12
|
cfa17b8 | Driveless cars, doesn't that sound like a splendid idea? I mean, think about it, a car that will drive itself and take you basically anywhere you please to go. Now, I know you may be thinking, "but don't we still have to do other things in order for this to work out and better technology?" The thing is we've had the tech for it since the 1980's and have been developing it ever since. So, are you all about the driveless car as I am?
Driveless cars are more and more of a thing now a days and it's progressing, more car companies want to invest in it as well. The thing about them is that they still need more time to be able to perfect it or at least maintainable for drivers to have. They're putting in new technology so it can be able to drive smoothly and carefully 100% of the time and so all you have to do is look at the road and take over whenever you need to. In the article "Driveless Cars Are Coming", he mentions that now the car can drive itself and be good over 90%. 90% is a lot if you think about it, 90% of the time the car is driving smoothly and carefully and everything. You don't have to worry about a thing, it has all the sensors and everything to detect and near by cars or accidents so you can take over to drive around or avoid holes or something.
But there are some downsides to having driveless cars. For example, there could be a malifunction with the cars system or there could be a system over ride. You never know what could happen is any of these things were to accure, so you also have to be safe about autodrive, as I like to call it. If there were an accident to ever accure or happen there would be problems on who to pin the blame on, either the driver or the manufacture. They wouldn't be certain because it can either be driving itself or the human could've done the error. But, they're still working on improving it and making it more persist and steady.
In conclusion, are you with the whole, driveless cars yet, because I am Mainly because I like the idea of being able to be driven around and how they can take us to our destination without having to do anything besides look at the road. Even so, it isn't that hard of a task to take over and drive for a couple of minutes if a contruction is going on or an accident happens. | 23
|
65af31e | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author suggest that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. I believe that his suggestion would be valid. The reasons that the author provides are apealing benefits for just the exploration of a challenging planet.
The author claims that the dangers of the planet can be overcome by just a few modifications to the average spacecraft, which would be projected to last only a couple of hours. These modifications would be made so that the spacecraft would last longer in the harsh conditions. The author states,"Each previous mission was unmanned, and for a good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours." This text shows the dangers of attempting to explore this planet. The author also stated, "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." This shows that even the best and strongest built technology would not be able to withstand this planets wrath.
Despite these dangerous and extreme conditions, NASA believes they may have determined a way to still explore this forbidden planet. NASA's solution would be to hover above the surface 30 or so miles to avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by not being in it. Paragraph 6 states,"At thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels." This shows that exploration of Venus would be harsh but definetly possible with the right equipment provided to withstand these conditions.
NASA is also working on other possible solutions for their Venus exploring issues. For example, in paragraph 7 it states,"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." Even though the simplified electronics only last for three weeks, a lot of information can be gathered in that time. Three weeks is definetly a lot longer than a couple of hours, which is what the normal spacecraft would withstand. But NASA is also working on old technology called mechanical computers. As paragraph 7 states,"These devices make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require eletronics at all. modern computers are enormously powerful, flexible, and quick, but tend to be more delicate when it comes to extreme physical conditions." This shows that collection of data on Venus is not as complex as upgrading technology, it means that NASA should just bulk up their already existing technology for the conditions presented.
Venus is a very tricky and very dangerous planet for exploration but despite all of those factors, it is still possible with the right technology. The benefits of this trip to Venus definelty outweigh the possible negativities. Though we may never be able to stay on Venus for more than three weeks or so, it would be worth the daring exploration so that we may become bold enough for even more daring explorations of our solar system. | 34
|
5b0af71 | Driverless cars is something that we have all saw, wether is be in a movie or had been referenced in a song or televison show. Cars that can operate by thereselfs is something every one would want to be alive to see happen, right? Who wouldnt want to relax a little while driving, and it be safe while doing it? The future would turn ito the present and driverless cars would became a well known thing and would be normal to see on the street.
"...such cars would fundamentally change the world." says Google cofounder, Sergey Brin, and I totally agree. The world is becoming more technology advanced, and scientist are discovering new things everyday. Years ago, if someone had said that everyone in america, or nearly everyone, would be carrying a celluar device around that could tell us almost anything, and could send instant messages to another person, even if its half way across the world, they would flip out. I wonder what they would have thought about cars that drive themselves? If we have the technology and resources to do this, why not? Driving would be a lot more fun, and more safe too.
Car manufacturers always look at driver saftey when designing a new model, or brand of car.Although this is a key aspect, humans are prone to have error. We dont have vision to look at our surroundings all at the same time, although We sure try. Humans are prone to unprevented error, but with the help from technonlogy, having driverless cars can be a whole heck safer. "Google's modified Toyota Prius uses position- estimating sensors on the left rear wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearview mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receivers and an intertial motion sensor." Thats a whole lot of detections all around the vehicle, even in the blind spots that we humans cant quite 100 percent see. The car would even alert you if it senses danger or a problem where it would need your assistence. In addition, It's even better for the world.
The car "...would use half of the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus." The world we live in today takes such things as, gas, as underappreciated. Gas isnt cheap nor renewable. Once we use all the gas, there's no more left. We have a limited supply and its hurting the earth more than you think. The world needs to cut back on such luxuaries and the smart cars would help. Half the price, half the gas per car than an average car. They offer more eco-friendliness than any other. therfore, smart cars that drive themselves, or with assistance ,should be something all states allow.
In conclusion, smart cars should be something in the near future. New technology gives us the opputunity to do things we never dreamed of. These cars would fundamentally change the world as we know it. Safer cars equals safer people which equal more lives saved. The world would also be a better place for everyone seeing as the cars are cutting down on gas than a regular vehicle. Smart cars are in the near future. | 34
|
18a40e7 | Reducing car usage is becoming a big thing in a lot of cities around the world. In some cities they're developing "car-free" days, a day without cars, to lower air pollution. Too many people are using cars and this is causing traffic jams and pollution in the air, which is not good for the environment. I believe that limiting car usage is an advantage because it can help prevent air pollution, traffic jams, and can make people open their mind to use other ways of transportation. Most cities in different countries are evolving and people are liking "car-free day".
Limiting car usage can prevent congestion in the streets which causes the air to be polluted. According to Source 2, Paris typically has more smog than other European capitals, so Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. Congestion went down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five days of intensifying smog. This really helps clear the air for polluted cities.
The population is growing everywhere, especially cities like Bogota, Colombia with 7 million. According to Source 3, it was the third straight year that cars have been banned with only buses and taxis permitted for the Day Without Cars in Bogota, Colombia. Millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated, or took buses to work leaving the streets of this capital city without any traffic jams. The turnout was large and people are liking this new change. For example, a businessman named Carlos Arturo Plaza said
"It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution."
Municipal authorities from other countries came to Bogota to see the event and were enthusiastic. The mayor of Asuncion, Paraguay said,
"These people are generating a revoluntionary change, and this is crossing borders."
Since these cities have made this change, there has been a great outcome from this.
There are many different ways you can go to places without having to use cars all the time. For example in Source 4, Mimi Sheller, a sociology professor at Drexel University, says
"Different things are converging which suggest that we are witnessing a long-term cultural shift."
In this source it explains that the internet makes telecommuting possible and allows people to feel more connected without driving to meet friends. The renewal of center cities has made the suburbs less appealing and has drawn empty nesters back in. Same with the rise in cellphones and car-pooling apps has facilitated more flexible commuting arrangements, including the evolution of shared van services for getting to work. With all of these changes, people who have stopped car commuting as a result of the recession may find less reason to resume the habit. | 23
|
dff0c49 | The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," stated that meeting the challenge of exploring Venus is valuable because it will provide more knowledge of the planet, but also because humans will be curious about many dangerous things in the future. The author stated many dangers and doubts of exploring the planet, but then described solutions that may or may not work. It is contradictive that he decided to include facts and data that went against his own thoughts because he came back and listed data that went against the negative statements. The author created confusion to what he actually believes.
The author of the article described Venus as Earth's "twin." That suggests that we already know some facts about Venus such as it's density and size, which is enough to make people curious to how much about Venus we already know. He said that we know that Venus has many similar structures to Earth, such as mountains, valleys, and craters. If Venus is Earth's "twin," doesn't mean that it is extremely similar to Earth? The statement could make people curious about how close Venus really is to Earth, or it could make them wonder why we should bother risking people's safety if we already know that Venus is just like Earth. The author needed to be clearer on which way he wanted people to view that statement.
The author also brought up the dangers of visiting Venus multiple times. Then, he would proceed to follow the statement with tested and untested solutions. It was hard to tell which way he sided. According to the author, "Venusian geolegy and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lighting strikes to probes..." He later stated that NASA has a possible idea to send blimp-like vehicles to travel the surface of Venus, but that would not provide a detailed enough view of the ground. In order to get his point across to the audience, he should not have kept going agianst information.
The author went off topic throughout the article. The different information created slight confusion as to what the message he was trying to convey. The author stated that NASA is working on an approach to studying Venus that involves mechanical computers. He then said, "The thought of computers existing in those days may sound shocking, but these devices make calculations by using gears and levers..." It is irrelevant to the message when the mechanical computers were envisioned or the fact that it is shocking to hear that computers existed in 1940. It was hard to understand why computers were important to the article at all. The author made it difficult to focus on the message when he was stating random facts that were not important to the idea he was trying to support.
The author did not make it extremly obvious as to what he was truly trying to convey. If he would been more clear and less contradictive, then it would have been more obvious that he supports the idea that Venus is worthy of being explored. Also, it would have been easier to understand the point he was trying to put across if he would have stayed on topic throughout the article. The message of the article should be obviously supported by the author. | 56
|
a0f4aea | The Seagonig Cowboys are a group of people who helped serve after World War 2. They brought horses and small cows to towns that were in ruins. To help these countrys they brought food and cattle. They went across the Pacific and Atlantic ocean to give the homeless food.
People should join this program because it help a town in need of assistance. If they didnt they could starve to death. They need to join this program not just for the people you are helping but to help yourself see the good inside yourself. Take Luke, he is a seagoing cowboy that made 9 trips. That is the longest any seagoing cowboy has ever went.
It clearly states on paragraph 5 that " Besides helping people, I had a side benifit of seeing Europe and China. But seeing the Acropolis in Greece was special." He also says it is an oppertunity of a lifetime. He said he couldnt say no. He says it takes about 2 weeks to get across the Alantic ocean. He went over the Atlantic ocean 16 times and the Pacific ocean twice to help those affected by World War 2.
In conclusion, people should join the seagoing cowboys. There are many side benifits of doing so. You could things you could never see and still help people. So, will you join the seagoing cowboys? | 12
|
4e0b72a | Amazing, fun, extraordinary, this is what the cars of 2020 will be! Could you have a car that drive's by it's own? Can you even believe that some cars are driverless? I know it's hard to believe when i studied about this topic it was unbelievable at first, but then I started to get in the topic a little bit more and it got promising!
Unbelievable car ready for 2020? Well in the story it say's, " Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by 2020." This is very promising and well i'm very anxious to have a car that is driverless! For me, I think driverless cars are very exciting and they would be very safe because humans wouldn't be driving them. one reason is because humans aren't perfect and they are alway's having accidents even in the more little thing! Google cofounder Sergey Brin say's," The cars he foresees would use half the fuel of today's taxis and offer far more flexibility than a bus."
It would be the best experience as drivers that we could ever have! Day by day technology is increasing in this world. They invent this driverless cars and later they are going to invent flying cars, it wouldn't really surprise me because of all the technology that the world has. People are increasing in knowledge and we're learning different stuff. Which is kind of interesting knowing how everything started, which i believe it was by God.
In conclusion, this driverless car idea is very promising and very realistic. It's going to be very fundamental because in the story it talks about the car is going to use half the fuel that taxis use which for the United States of America this would be very good savings! This idea is the best idea i've heard about cars because they care about the safety of the driver. So why not be anxious for a driverless car that's going to be ready in 2020! | 12
|
f7233fb | In my opinion, driverless cars are going to be a positive thing for people. The driverless cars have been improving throughout the years,they will be more safe, and they will make us more alert when driving.
Driverles cars have been on the road to progress for a number of years. They have been upgraded to figure out what does and doesn't work. For example, in the text it says, " For example, in the late 1950's, General Motors created a concept car that could run on a special test track. The track was embedded with an electrical cable that sent radio signals to a receiver on the front end of the car." It also says, " These smart- road systems worked surprisingly weel, but they required massive upgrades to exisiting roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical." This evidence shows that the driverless cars have been tested and improved throughout the years.
Another reason why I think driverless cars are a good thing is because of safety. These driverless cars have sensors that help the car and the human be in control of it. In the text it says, " The information from the sensors can cause the car to apply brakes on individual wheels and reduce power from the engine, allowing far better response and control than a human driver could manage alone." This evidence shows that these sensors can help the human driver drive more safe. Another piece of evidence is that in the text it says, " The google car simply announces when the driver should be prepared to take over. Other options under the consideration are flashing lights on the windshield and other heads-up displays. Manufacturers are also considering using cameras to watch that drivers are remaining focused on the road. While the driver watches the road, the car watches the driver." This evidence shows that the more they are working on driverless cars, the more ways they are finding ways to make them more safe.
My last reason to why driverless cars are better than others are because they make the drivers more alert when driving. In the text it talks about how the driverless cars will not be completely driverless because there is still human control needed. In the text it says, " but the special touch sensors make sure the driver keeps a hold of the wheel." Also it says, " They can steer, accelerate and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents. This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situations requires." This evidence shows that the driver must be alert and focused, not slacking off and not paying attention.
In conclusion I think driverless cars are going to be a positive thing for people because they have been improving them over the years, they will be more safe, and they will help us become more alert when driving. | 45
|
cae51a8 | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author supports his idea well. I agree with him because he makes several valid points and its logical. Throughout the article the author states how Venus is our sister planet and was once an Earth like planet. By saying this he proves how we are trying to make our way to our sister planet and also throws in more ideas.
Firstly, the author states in paragraph 3 "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." This quote from the passage shows how the author is trying to get the point across that Venus is very inhospitable. This helps support his idea because it then allows him to state ways on how we would be able to reach our sister planet and gather more data from it.
Secondly, the texts states in paragraph 4 "Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Eath. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters." This supports the authors claim by stating Venus was once a planet just like Earth and was able to Host life forms on it. By researching Venus more we may be able find out what caused the demise and of the once habitable planet.
Thirdly, the article states in paragraph 5 "Just as our jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. At thirty-plus miles above the surface, tempatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Eath. Solar power would be plentiful and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." This supports the authors claim because it show just how we could survive Venus harsh conditions. He says it wont be easy, but with the rate technology is advancing we will soon be able to make a Venus trip possible.
In conclusion, I would agree with the author because getting to Venus may take time and advancements in technology, but it would all be worth becasue we would get to see the origin of our sister planet. We would also possibly get to see what caused Venus's demise. By finding the cause of Venus's destruction we could possibly prevent it from happening to our home planet. As the author stated "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." | 34
|
b9d2914 | The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the danger. Throughout the article, the author supports this claim very well. The author gives a few real benefits for exploring Venus. The author continuously tells us, the readers, about advancing technology thanks to human curiosity. The author even gives problems and solutions to explore Venus.
At the end of the article, paragraph 8, the author says, "Striving to meet the challenges 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." This means that by exploring Venus, we will gain knowledge and be prepared for future missions with similar conditions. Paragraph 4 talks about Venus's past like how it "may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." With knowledge of Venus's past, we could not only learn about Venus more, but we could use that information and compare it to Earth to predict some of Earth's future. That is how Venus's benefits outweighs its dangers.
In paragraph 7, it talks about NASA's interest to study Venus. In doing so, NASA is creating better technology and pushing the human race further. "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 contitions." With advancing technology thanks to the interest in Venus, we can now create objects that can survive over 800 degrees Fahrenheit on Venus's surface for three weeks. That is how studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers because we advance with the study.
Throughout the article, many problems are brought up with solutions. For example, paragraph 3 talks about Venus's dangerous conditions that aren't fit for humans, but in paragraph 5, NASA believes they can solve this problem by allowing scientists to float above the chaotic conditions which would allow humans to go to Venus and study it better. Paragraph 6 introduces the problem that humans wouldn't be able to gather a lot of information if they are on a ship orbiting Venus because of its dense atmosphere. In paragraph 7, the article says, "systems that use mechanical parts can be made more resistant to pressure, heat, and other forces." Paragraph 7 gives us the solution to the problem in paragraph 6. This in turn can also relate to the fact that our technology would advance thanks to the planning for Venus. That is how the author supports his claim by giving us problems and solutions to explore Venus, which negates some of the dangers.
With insight from Venus, advancing technology, and solutions to problems, the author supports his claim. The author tells us about benefits of exploring Venus. The author tells us how technology would advance thanks to the curiosity humans possess for Venus. The author tells us solutions to problems which negates some of the dangers. Therefore, the author supports his claim very well since he gave reasons why the study of Venus is a worthy pursuit, and why some of the dangers aren't a big enough threat to stop humans. | 45
|
862fb5a | The author shows that the idea of studying Venus is a good idea even though it is dangerous by using many details from the text. The author uses descriptive evidence and examples to show us what to expect. It is also showed in the passage that the author gives us possible solutions to our current problems. Finally, the author also gives us facts to further prove their point. So the author uses many different types of ways to show how the studying of Venus is a good idea even with the many dangers that come with it.
The author uses descriptive evidence and examples to prove their point and to give us a visual in our head to show us what they means exactly. For example, the text states, ¨A thick atmosphere of almost 97 perecent carbon dioxide blankets Venus...Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus`s atmosphere.¨ The auhtor uses adjectives like thick and highly to show us exactly whats going on, to give us a visual in our heads. The text also states, ¨...such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals.¨ The auhtor is giving us an example to imagine and for us to fully understand just how dangerous this environment is. This shows that the author uses descriptive evidence to prove their point, as well as examples of just how dangerous the planet is.
Another way is, the auhthor also gives us problems and possible solutions to those problems, they use problem and solution. For example, the text states, ¨A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide...clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid....NASA`s possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray.¨ This evidence shows that there is a problem with how dangerous Venus`s atmosphere is, so the author then says in the paragraph after that NASA may have a solution. The text also states, ¨However peering at Venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditons...researchers cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from a distance...NASA is working on other approaches...simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus`s surface...¨ This shows that the author gave our problem once again about how the scientists can`t get anything done from a far, so they then continued to tell us readers how NASA is working on a new type of electronic to whitstand Venus`s surface. This shows that the author states a problem and then a solution to further prove their point.
Finally the author uses facts to prove their point. For example, the text states, ¨...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 conditons¨ This evidence shows that author is showing us that this is a soultuion to a problem and in doing so they are giving us facts to prove their claim. The text also states, ¨At thrity-plus miles above the surface, tempatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit...¨ This evidence shows that yet again there is another possible solution to on of our many problems and to give better reasoning to their claim the author uses facts. This proves that the author uses facts to further encourage their point of view.
So the author uses many key ways of proving their point. They used problem solution to further their reasoning. As well as examples and descriptive eveidence to show us what exactly was happening. Finally they used facts to help persuade us that this is worth studying. That is how the author proved that studying Venus is worth it even with the risks involved. | 45
|
51dfce2 | In my opinion, the Facial Action Coding System is only telling what the faces are expressing not how the person is feeling. A person can be making one face but, can be feeling different. This technology couldn't be valuable to students in a classroom. The author states that Dr. Huang predicts, " A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." and then goes on to talk about how the computer would modify the lessons for the student. The computer could suggest the student is feeling one emotion but the student could really be feeling another. A student could be mad and irritated but the computer could suggest it is confused by the facial expressions the student is showing. A student could look tired but, could be feeling happy and the computer could suggest that the student is sad and miserable when in reality the student is just tired.
The article also states that Dr. Paul Eckman is using six basic emotions; happiness, surpise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. There are many more emotions that just these six, so when the computer is trying to calculate a facial expression it could be way off from how the student is really feeling since it is only using six basic emotions.
In my opinion, no, The Facial Action Coding System would not be valuable for students in a classroom. The system has only six basic emotions, which a student could be feeling none of. People don't know what another person is feeling by only looking at their facial expression. I don't agree that The Facial Action Coding System could know what a person is feeling just by seeing a facial expression especially if a human can't and I don't believe this system could be of any valuable use for a student in a classroom. | 23
|
3933370 | Luke said he grew up on an farm with his aunt so he wanted to help the animals. After World War 2 Luke wanted to help the countries recover by bringing food supplies and animals. Luke loved animals because when he was younger he had lived on a farm. So when he heard UNRRA is hirring Seagoing Cowboys to take care of Horses,Cows,and Mules he and his friend Don signed up. This to Luke this was an opportunity of a life time.
Luke got on an boat called SS Charles W. Wooster and there were 335 Horses plus hay and oats to feed the Horses. When Luke was 18 he could be drafted to be in the military but when they heard he was on a cattle boat trip they told Luke to stay. In 1947 Luke made nine trips the most out of any Seagoing Cowboy. Luke said "Besides helping people, I had the side benefit of seeing Europe and China. But seeing the Acropoils in Greece was special,"he says.
If you get to go on this trip you would be busy but you would have so much fun. Also if you like caring for people and animals you would be perfect for this journey. Another reason is if you like travling on a boat and don't get sea sick you should try being a Seagoing Cowboy or girl. Not only that but you could become famous just for helping people. Then again you should always help people. Luke went would you? | 12
|
88784a0 | As I admit that the concept of a driverless vehicle is interesting and sounds very cool. Although, I can not agree that a driveless car would be safe for the public in any way shape or form. What if a problem comes up, and we need to take action ourselves? Would this car be expensive to produce? Do we really need a driveless car? This concept needs to be tossed away and we need to focus on the now instead of the later.
Safety is a big concern we have in our country. how do we keep people safe? Driveless cars will only add to this concern. In paragraph 9 the author states "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-the driver or the manufacturer?" this statement sparks a concern for people. What if the technology fails? how will we be able to stop an accident in a car that drives it self? We need to think that if there is a mistake in the programming of the car or the production, that a person life is at stake. This is a good reason why these cars shouldn't be produced and that is for the risk that we could lose people to somehting we won't have control over.
Another safety hazard is the unthinkable accidents. Anything can happen, and when somehting occurs how will this driverless car respond? In paragrph 7, the author states that the car will alert the driver to take control if there are work zones or to move the car around an accident. Those are things we can expect to happen but what about the the things we may not expect? How will the car alert us if the unknown happens? If there was a construction mishap and a beam falls down to hit the road, the car wouldn't have enought time to alert us.
We wouldnt have the time to react to such an event quickly enough.\
When an accident happens, who will be at fault, the driver or the manufacturer? As a new way to get around comes out, we need to make laws for the driving speed limits and other things. If a driverless car came on to the scene, what would happen in a accident? who would be at blame for the accident. It's a serious question that needs to be answered. It cant be the drivers because they had no control. At the same time it can't be the one who made the car either, depending on the accident. This car isn't safe for us. How will we even decide the laws for driving if its a car that drives it's self?
The idea of a driveless car is interesting and it's futuristic. We may someday have the capablities to even construct a car that can. Even so, There is too much bad that can happen and to many questions on how will we even react to these situations. So the idea can wait and we can focus on much more important things inour society that need fixing today. | 34
|
c83d850 | "Is this a face created by aliens or a landform" many wonder. This specific picture of a so called "face" on Mars has captured the eyes of many. The picture that NASA has showen or released to us resembles a face like landform on Mars in 1976, but in the picture that was taken in 2001 clearly shows it was just a landform. Many people thought that there was possible life on Mars, but they are yet to discover if there really is. Many landforms like this so called "face" are found in the American West.
This "face" is just another theory that there is life on Mars.
Many people want to believe that there is life on Mars, so when the Vicking took the photo it just made them think that there was a greater chance of life on Mars.
There has been many thoughts on if this picture could really be a face or just a landform, but with improved technology NASA discovered that this "face" had occured naturally, not created by aliens. A face that was created by aliens wouldn't stick out as far as this natural landform, nor would it have stayed on Mars for over 30 years. Landfroms usually occur naturally, so who knows how long this "face'' could have been there when there were photographs taken of it , but then again it could have just popped up the day that Vicking landed there.
In 2001 they went back to see if this was an actual face or just a landform and with the higher quality cameras they could simply zoom in, which they did, and see that this was just a naturally occuring landform that formed over time. Naturally occuring lanforms happen over periods of time and that is simply what happened on Mars, it just happened to look a lot like a face.
In conclusion, this ''face'' is just a natural landform that formed over the years. There has yet to be life discovered on Mars, just landforms that have shapes of faces. Aliens did not create this face, nor was there an actual face in the Mars surface. There should be more pictures taken of this ''face'' so that it will prove that it occured naturally. Therefore, there are no faces or life on Mars surface. | 23
|
61f7a9c | When the first photograph of the "Face on Mars" appeared in 1976, researchers and the general public lost their minds. The 'face' was a blurry and shadowy photo from the Viking 1 mission. The photo resembled a human face with eyes, a nose, and a mouth. Dispite all of the scientific and theorietical chaos it created, researchers at the National Areonautics and Space Administration (NASA) discovered that the 'face' was just a matian mesa.
Many people, even today, believe that this natural landform is actually an alien monument. This fallacy lead to many studies, researches, and experiments to find out what the face was. One explaination should cool the heated debated is that NASA is a professional institution built to study this very topic. It is also comprised of educated experts that work to learn and discover more for the rest of the population to learn correctly. However, this is not enough for many people to prove only the plausible.
In "Unmasking the Face on Mars," the first portion of the article shows 3 compared photographs. These photographs are all of the 'face,' just in 3 different years. The first photo was taken in 1976, the next was in 1998, and the last one was taken in 2001. Each photo perfectly shows a new piece of the 'face' that was not well understood. The first photo shows what does clearly look like a face in the shadows, but as the photos become more recent, the face receads and becomes what looks like a river, or lava system flowig down the sides. These photographs were taken by separate space missions by none other than NASA. These photos are what fueled the conspiracy theorists theories but only because of the lack of information that they had at the time.
In the article, in paragraph 7, it states that on April 5, 1998, the Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) had taken the sharpest photo of the time. This photo stood to prove what the NASA researchers were trying to say. The photograph itself proved that there were not alien markings on the 'face' and that it was only a natural landmark. This photo showed that the elements that made up the 'face,' were just "the Martian Equivalent of a butte or mesa." (12) It showed small elevated spots on the surface that, from afar and in the shadows, a human-like face appeared around all of it.
However, for some headstrong citizens, this still was not enough to prove what the photo really showed. This lead to the 2001 MGS mission to capture yet another, improved photo of the surface of Mars. The team that which took the photo prided themselves on taking the "extraordinary photo with the camera's absolute maximum resolution." (10) In paragraph 10 of the article, it explains that in 2001, the resolution of the photo (1.56 meters per pixel) was beyond fantastic compared to the resolution of the 1976 photo (43 meters per pixel). This comparison is enough to show that in 2001, the landmark could be seen very clearly with the human eye and could be clearly made out as just a landform. The photo was clearly just a bit o' rock jutting out of the surface of Mars.
The 1976 controversy over the "Face on Mars" was truely a very heated debate. Starting in 1976 when a blurry image of a face on Mars made it's way through the minds of the Americans, the "Face on Mars" was concieved to be an alien relic of some sort. Years later, a new photograph produced by NASA in 1998 began to settle long held debates over the face. It proved to many researchers that this startling human like face was only a natural landmark with a coincedental shape and shadow. This did not, however, settle all of the disputes amongst the ammeture conspiracy theorists. To further prove the point, NASA pushed it's limits in 2001 and took an amazingly sharp photo of the land mark. The photo was pure proof to the nation that the fantisized face was only a small mesa on the surface of Mars. Even today some theorists still try to hold their ground in their thoughts, but it will always be known to science as just a martian mesa that caused some commotion. | 34
|
915416d | I believe the face is just a natural landform because its not possible for a planet to have a face. I feel that NASA just wants the public's attention, yea they have pictures but with technology now anything can look how you want it to. Pictures can be very decieving and these pictures don't look quite real. In the article it not everyone was satisfied, that's because noone really believed it. Not many people really even believes in aliens so why would they believe that markings have been left behind by them.
Im sure that Mars is just having a few natural changes because its so old. Also the article explains that they have a digital camera that makes thing three times bigger than pixel size meaning that this "Face" doesn't quite look like a face without this effect on it. And so what if it did look like a face that doesn't mean that there's life on this planet. Its just having a natural change after many years, that's why NASA is waiting years to go back to get another picture, because its changing in those years.
Maybe its just that I'm the type that has to see things for myself in person to be able to believe but as far as the little information they have on this planet I will never believe this. See in the first few pictures what looks like what's happening is the ground is slightly erupting which makes it forms oddly. Just coincidently it happens to look like a face.The 2001 picure honestly didn'tlook like a face. So that's partly why I feel its just a natural change on Mars. | 12
|
42d86ef | Many people believe that driving makes everything easier since it gets you from point A to point B. But so does walking or riding a bike. There are many advantages to limiting car usage all over the world. Limiting car usage not only decreases the problem of smog or greenhouse gas emission it also helps give back to the economy in different ways.
Limiting car usage helps decrease any sort of problem with smog or greenhouse gas emission. As stated in Source 2, "Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city"(10). Since Paris decided to enforce the ban, the smog had cleared enough Monday for the French party to rescind the ban on Tuesday. Thus proving the point that limiting car usage either through a ban or just a vehicle-free zone, as in Germany, it can reduce smog and/or greenhouse gas emission. Greenhouse gas emission can be reduced simply by either switching to a more economy efficient car such as the hybrid or creating a low-car surburban society. As stated in Source 1, "Passenger cars are resposible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States."(5).Businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza asserted that "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution"(Source 3,24) demonstrating that more than one person agree that lowering the use of cars is good for any society.
Economy may get better but it might just all depend on whether or not society begins to limit their car usage. As car usage is decreasing, people now have time to go out and be care free. As they stop limiting themselves from just driving from one place to another, more opportunities arise. Places such as "parks and sport centers also have bloomed throughout the city"(Source 3, 28) because people now have the time,instead of being stressed,to go have fun. Now new restaurants and even upscale shopping districts have cropped up, these places are being placed because of the restriction on driving your car. Even though it may have "negative implications for the car industry"(Source 4,34) our economy will be boosted leaving the negative implications for car industry out of the question when it comes to advantages versus disadvantages. People will have stores within walking distance and since there will be suburbs with car-free zones it makes communication easier and faster, leaving driving places from stressing anyone out.
Everything isnt always dependent on time and if you have to work, with these suburbs containing car-free zones, stores are only a walk away instead of "along some distant highway"(Source 1,6). As mentioned in Source 3 "the goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog"(21) and with limited car usage it is guaranteed that this will occur. Even though cars may be needed, there are many more efficient ways of achieving something without using your car. America has already joined in reducing their driving percentage by either using environment friendly cars or not receiving a license at all. Places all over the world believe the limiting of vehicles in their society supports their country thus a low-car society is what it takes to "conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety"(Source 4, 43). | 34
|
13846d3 | How amazing would it be if you were able to detect exactly how other people are feeling? It would be great, would it not? Well, with new software called the Facial Action Coding System, you are able to do just that. The use of this technology could be extremely valuable to students in a classroom.
This software has classified six basic emotions-happiness,surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. Having stated this, this software can inform teachers on how their students are feeling. In paragraph 6 of the article, it states, "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." If teachers know exactly how their students are feeling, they can provide better aid. This is only possible if the Facial Action Coding System is implemented in schools.
Although, we can probably tell how a student is feeling simply by the look on their face, it is not as effective as using this software. Teachers do no have the time to be guessing how their students are feeling. It would waste too much time. If this technology would be implemented in schools, teachers would be able to help more students in a more efficient mannner.
The implementation of this technology in schools would be amazing, hands down. Not adopting this technology would be an ignorant choice. Knowing what students are struggling in would be made easy. Also, teachers would be able to provide aid to more students than before. Its benefits outweigh any negatives that might be present. | 23
|
5bd28b9 | Reasons to join the Seagoing Cowboys program are so many! Take Luke for a example, He got to explore and see Europe and Luke crossed the Atlantic Ocean 16 times and crossed the Pacific Ocean twice!
Also,Luke didn't just have fun for himself,he also helped people who were affected by World War II. The group that helped those runied countries and affected people were UNRRA (the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration).Where Luke comes in is when the UNRRA needed people to take care of horses,young cows,and mules that were shipped overseas the UNRRA hired Seagoing Cowboys to do that job. After hearing about that Luke and his friend Don signed up. Also its not boring on the ship full of animals because the cowboys could do the following;baseball,vollyball,table-tenis,fencing,boxing,reading,whittling and games. Luke went on many amazing places such as the Acropolis in Greece,taking a gondola ride in Venice,Italy,Luke toured the excavated castle Crete,and marvled at the Panama Canal on his way to China,plus that was his only favorite places not all the places he went so you can imagine all of the places you could go!
There so many possibilites you can do with this wonderful job. You can make new friends and see all new places you could never imagine,and even start a new and exciting life. | 12
|
d9cb2a4 | The new technology that can describe how you are feeling from just ypur face is called, The Facial Action Coding system can be usefull in some positive ways or negitive,like it says in the articel you can read you classroom mines and you will know how they feel. In my opinion i think that they should use The Facial action coding system because you never know what someone is hidding or what they thing about the lesson in class or the work in a job. Also most of us will probably know how someone is feeling but some of us will not and that is were the Facial Action Coding system kickes in.
The most important thing about his machine is that there has been people that committed suicede and if the machine can detect what you feel i think that it can detect those people or kids and that way thier parents or teachers could know and stop it from happening and that machine can save a life or two. The machine can be also be used for police officers that need to slove a case or thing that someone is lying so they will just have to put the machine in thier face and ask questions and that will beb a win for th epolice officers. The article also said that the drawing of Mona Lisa was not only smilling she was also, ''9 percent disgusted, 6 percent fearful, 83 percent happy and 2 percent angry''. So if that machine told them all those percents in just a smile that the painting did that is amazing.
The best way to put this is that anything is posiblie you just have to do it, Because in the article it says ''Moving you facial muscles not only expresses emotions but also may even help prduce them put on a happy face. I alsways thought that mona lisa was just happy in a picture but never in my mind did i thing that she was much more than just happy. The best is yet to come and we will not be worried about the stuff that happens becasue of their emotions because the Facial Action Coding System will get us covered.
So i ask you Did making a happy face in this experiment also make you feel slightly happy. | 12
|
ab74e1a | Did you ever wonder what getting sea sick feels like? Well in this prompt I going to talk about a guy named Luke who wants to covince people to join the Seagoing Cowboys program. Well I think people shouldn't join the Seagoing Cowboys Program because of getting sea sick, maybe getting lost, or even dying.
First, getting sea sick. People who get sea sick probaly die of the disease or even get really sick. I can infer this is the number one reason for not going on boats people came up with.
Secondly, maybe getting lost in the ocean. Lots of people had this problem before but maybe not today. People can die or even just end up somewhere away from their families at home awaiting for their arrival. I can infer this happend alot to people who forgot which way to go to land.
Last, dying. This has happend because of either disease faling off the ship and being stranded or even starvation or drought. Another reason is because of other people attacking them. I can infer this happened often to people who did not pay attention to where they were going or to anything
To conclude this essay I'm going to list the three main reasons I thought not to join the Seagoing Cowboys program one getting sea sick, secondly getting lost, or even dying. Would you still join this program after you read this paper? | 12
|
fb3b110 | When election day comes and you finally drop your vote in the ballet box after waiting in line for the past hour, you walk away knowing that you have helped the candidate of your choice to rise to the top of the voting pole. Oh how wrong you are. The United States works on a voting system called the Electoral College. "Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president." (Plumer 10). This system has stood the test of time, however it has masked its flaws for long enough. "60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now." (Plumer 9). The people have spoken, now it is time to break down the logistics...
In order to understand the flaws in the electoral college, you need to know what the electoral college is, and how it came to be. "The Electoral College process consists of the selection of the electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for President and Vice President, and the counting of the electoral votes by Congress." (Office of the Federal Register 2). This system was created by the founding fathers as a compromise between the congressional vote and the popular vote. However there was a reason for this new, seperated voting system. During their time the founding fathers where among the most educated men in the country. Back then education was not standard and very few people could read or write. The founding fathers did not want uneducated citizens voting on the individual who would lead the country. So they created a system where the uneducated would vote for a group of educated men, who would in turn vote on a president. Thus the electoral college was born. The founding fathers reasons for forging this system where justified in their day and age. However the world has changed since then. These days education is standard and people have enough sense to know what each candidate has to offer, and who can guide our country to prosperity. If United States citizens are well educated, then why leave this barrier up?
Another large issue with the electoral college is its favoritism towards larger states. The United States was founded on federalism and democracy, giving power to the people instead of an over-arching central government ruling everything. So any policy that goes against our right to equal say in politics ought to be abbolished, right? The number of electors per state under the Electoral College is determined by the number of representatives the state has in congress. "... one for each member in the House of Representatives plus two for your senators..." (Office of the Federal Register 3). Since this system is based on population, bigger states get a emense priority over smaller states. "The popular vote was very close in Florida [in 2012]; nevertheless Obama, who won that vote , got 29 electoral votes. A victory by the same margin in Wyoming would net the winner only 3 electoral votes." (Posner 21). This means that presidential candidates are going to focus on appealing to larger swing states that have more electoral votes, rather than smaller ones who only provide a few votes. That is not fair now is it? No matter how small a state may be its population still consists of United States' citizens, and they deserve just as much say as a bigger state. After all, that is the concept our country was founded on, equality and freedom.
If the Electoral College does not seem like a flawed system now, allow me to open your eyes to one last variable in our little Electoral equation. The disaster factor. The disaster factor deals with the will of the people, and them doing anything to get what they want. "Back in 1960, segregationists in the Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratic electors with new electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy. (So that the popular vote for Kennedy would not actually gone to Kennedy.)" (Plumer 11). That kind of scenario could completely change a close call to a landslide victory! The 1960 election is not the only case of this either. It happened again when Hawaii sent two slates of electors to congress, and in other various cases electors did not vote for their designated candidate. Finally there is the case of the 2000 election, where Al Gore won the popular vote, but lost the Electoral College! If just one person decides to go against the grain, everything gets thrown off.
Case and point, the Electoral College is a flawed system. People are educated and can make a smart choice for a president, everyone deserves fair say in the political world, and people need to open their eyes to the corruption that the Electoral College allows for. It may have made sense back in the day of the founding fathers, but it is time to move on and adopt the popular vote system that the people have asked for. | 45
|
13b3e1f | The tecnolegy has been develope so far during the 21centre ,but to be the honest is that is a good things for us . l am totally disagrue
to produce this kind of car in this unpropreate time.
Driverless car is the car contain the high technology, but it's not means it's completly automatic .It's means still need the driver but you can pay less attension on it .i think if the car is half automatic ,it will be work .The reason is basic on two simple word "safe'and 'money'. For example .In the late 1950s, general motors created a concept car that could run on a special test track. The track was embedded with an electical cable that sent radio signal s to a receiver on the front end of the car . Engineers at Berkeley tried someting similar, but they used magnets with alternating polarity. The car read the positive and negative polarity as messages in binary code . These smart-road system worked surprisingly well, but they required massive upgrages to existing roads ,something that was simly too expensice to be pratice .The car is not human, they are smart , but no that smart or we can say they can not choose the answer more sencitive .This can dirve on the normal road ,but if there are some assidence or trafic what will the car do ! The car may directly go a head and this
will cause alot of danger .On the other hand ,the car should cause lot of money.The car need money , the car road need money ,the car system need money.The car is not like iphone and another technolgy ,it's relate to our life .Futher improvements in sensors and computer hand ware and software to make driving safer are also leading to cars that can handle more and more drinving task on it own .The internet developed so fast ,but the computer virus also increase .If their ways one day , someone have an bad idea , then he create an virus in to the car system .This will cause large area car assident and economic decrease .Who can take the responsible ,if that happens .
The drivierless car is a great idea ,but it's not a great idea to start right now Because we don't have money and it's danger for human's life . | 23
|
e57b857 | Autonomous cars seem like they would never happen, but our world is changing and they are just around the corner. Autonomous cars are cars that are driven by a computer and not a human. Although, a driver can still take control when needed. The computers know know to drive and when to stop or go. In the article it states that the autonomous cars will use half the fuel of today's taxis and they are more flexible than a bus. The new cars though are not in total control, the drivers still can drive. I do not think that the driverless are a good idea and they should not be developed. They are dangerous, very expensive, and making our world more lazy.
To begin the driverless cars are extremely dangerous. Some people will have the driverless cars and some will be normal. The driverless cars let the driver take over if needed. The seats will vibrate, the voice control will come on, or any way to get the drivers attention; according to the article. What if the driver fell asleep and is a very hard sleeper. The cars might not be able to wake him or her up in time. Then, resulting in a crash or even more tragic. I think that the cars that are not driven by a computer are in danger. The driverless car will know when to stop and go at a stop light, but what if another car goes on accident and they did not mean to. It could be a pile up and a mess. The cars are just not safe enough for me to think that they should be developed.
Another reason I do not approve of driverless cars are that they are expensive. Yes, they do get better gas millage, but the cost of the cars to begin with is going to be outrageous. Somepeople and companies are not going to be able to afford the cars. The cars savings on gas will never compare to the crazy cost of them to begin with.
It states in the article that the upgrades to existing roads will be simply too expensive to be practical. I agree with this statement completely that the money will not be practical. The cars do have more flexible schedules than busses, but i would rather ride a bus than a very expensive car. There is a possibility of it getting into a crash and then you would have to get it fixed with even more bills. The car is just too expensive and crazy.
Lastly, the car in my opinion is lazy. The world today would rather have someone else care for them and for them to just relax. Yes, relaxing is nice, but you have to know what work is. The car is just another way for the world to be lazy. Driving is not that hard on your body, it is moving your feet and paying attention. The car just allows the world to have another way to be lazy. I think that it is good for your body to pay atttention and keep your eyes on the road. It makes you not drift off and think about what you are doing. The people that will have to take control after the car can't go through crashes or traffic will not be on their top watch. They probably will be sleepy or not paying attention. I just don't like to think of another way for society to have a reason to be lazy.
In conclusion, I do not agree with the development of driverless cars. They are dangerous, cost a lot of money, and they are a way for people to be more lazy. They will not benefit our society in any way. People have more control over a car than a computer. The money that people don't have should be used on food not cars. Somepeople are having a hard time providing for their family let alone having a car payment too. Also society is lazy enough without these driverless cars. The development of autonomous cars should not happen because the cars are never going to benefit society. | 34
|
fda6f30 | In the passage, "The Challenge of Exploring Venus', the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit for scientists. The author includes many advantages and disadvantages in the passage. The author is very good at explaing why and how we can acheive this goal. He also explains his stance very clearly, offering advice and explaining both sides. Venus is very much alike to Earth, yet scientists have yet to truly understand the planet. While there are some challenges that his idea presents, there are more benefits and advantages. Exploring and continuing to study Venus would benefit us greatly, both in the present, and in the future.
The author says that studying Venus would be beneficial for many reasons. One being that Venus is very much alike to Earth. The author states that "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system". He says that both planets share many important qualities that we as humans, need for survival. He states that "Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of like, just like Earth" and "Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. This information shows that Venus and Earth are similar and with more knowledge about the planet, they could possibly visit Venus in the future.
Another reason why Venus should be further explored is to further our knowledge and our basis of understanding. The author says in the passage that "Human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors.". He also says that "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". This is very true. Struggles and obstacles in our way or obtaining knowledge should not prevent us from continuing forever, but should motivate us to find another way to acheive our goal. Although there may be obstacles that seem impossible to overcome, scientists can and will overcome them. Continuing to study Venus will acheive just this concept.
How we are going to visit Venus without getting injured by the elements is simple. Although Venus has many obstacles that will make it hard for us to come in contact and learn more, NASA has a great solution. The author says that by creating a type of vehicle that could hover just over the Venusian landscapes, scientists would be able to study Venus safely. Being at a certain height above the planet would prevent unsurvivable conditions and make it bearable for humans to be there. The author does say however, that because they are so high, their vision would be limited. This idea is favorable and definetly acheivable in the near future.
In conclusion, studying Venus is a very worthy pursuit. The author gives many benefits for the continuation of studying Venus and he also gives reasoning as to why and how we can do it. He supports his idea very well with immense amoun of evidence to back up his claim. The universe is hugely immeasurable and Venus is the next door neighbor to Earth. While scientists have access to improving technology and while they have the resources to do so, they should take action towards studying Venus. | 45
|
fed700f | I think that the development of these driverless cars is a good thing. Somebody has already started making these cars, and have actually tested them. Although "driveless" cars will still need a driver, drivers will be doing something when the car doesn't need them, they won't get bored. New driving laws will make driverless cars safer for the driver, passengers, and pedestrians.
In the article, it says that Google has had these cars driven independently since 2009.
These cars have driven more than half a million miles without a crash. In 2013, BMW announced the development of "Traffic Jam Assistant." The car can handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph. It will have special touch sensors making sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel for any issues. Mercedes Benz, Audi, and Nissan all plan to have driverless cars by 2020. I think it's safe to say that eventually all car brands will have driverless cars in a couple of years.
Drivers of a driverless car won't just be waiting for their turn to drive, they'll be able to do many things. Accoding to the article, manufacturers hope to bring in-car entertainment. Manufactorers also want to bring in information systems that use heads-up displays. these displays will be able to be turned off when the driver needs to take over. These in-car systems are actually a safety feature, and safety is important.
In most states it is illegal to test computer-driven cars. States like California, Nevada, and Florida have allowed limited use of semi-autonomous cars.
According to the article, manufactorers believe that more states will follow as soon as driverless cars are proven to be reliable safe. When driverless cars are proven to be safe, laws will be made to keep the driver, passengers, and pedestrians safer.
In conclusion, I think that driverless cars will be the new way to drive in a couple of years. Laws will be made to keep everyone safe, and drivers of these cars won't have to sit and wait to drive.
I think that these driverless cars will make things safer, possibly less reckless driving, and less car accidents. We must keep improving our technology in order to find better ways to stay safe, and I think these driverless cars is a great way to start. | 23
|
378b941 | From Luke's piont of view covincing others to participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program.
There are three reasons why you and others should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program. One of them is taking care of animals, the other one is having unbelievable trips, the last one is the jobs you do and the free time.
The first one were going to talk about are taking care of the animals.
When you join the Seagoing Cowboys program you have to care the horses until they go to a different person.
Another supporting detail is about the cows, you need the cows to get the milk from or what are the others participates going to drink.
The last supporting detail is the mules that were shipped overseas.
Those were all the supporting details for the reason about taking care of animals.
The other reason that were going to support is the unbelievable trips they travel by.
The first supporting detail is about the cattle-boat trips they get when they participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program. Also, we get to tour an excavated castle in Crete.
they also marveled at the Panama Canal on there way to China. That is another reason why you and the others should participate.
The other reason you should join is you got to do many jobs so you won't be bored, and you also get free time.
One job you get is being a night watchman you get to check on all the animals every hour.
Another one is cleaning up. You have to feed and water the animals two or three times. Bales of hay and bags of oats had to be pulled up from the lower holds of the ship, and also the stalls had to be cleaned.
Those were all the reasons and supporting details of why you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program.
There were three things to support my reasons in each paragraph.
That is why people should join the Seagoing Cowboys program. | 23
|
9a8210e | Should more driverless cars be made in the future, do they really help? There are positives and negatives of the driverless cars. A positive, according to the passage is "that cars have sensors that make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel." Having that sensor can keep the driver alert of the road and drivers around. Another positive would be" the seats vibrating, they are to alert the driver when the car is in danger of backing up into an object". That is important because things such as vehicles are closer then they really are in the mirrors. So when your backing up, you could be closer then you think and without the alerting of the vibrating seat, you could tap someones car, which would lead to some very exspensive bills for you or worse losing the right to drive. This all sounds great but, there are negatives too to these amazing cars, unfortunatly. Say you have and older driverless car and the sensors don't work as quickly and you hit someone from behind. You say you were paying attention or your car didn't say anything, who's fault is it really then? Is it your fault, should you be charged or let off because of a "bad" car? We all know technology is nice, fast ,and very helpful but, we also all know you can't always depend on technology. It shuts down or gets viruses, or could just die on us at the very time we need it. If you were in a car accident and you were the one that had been hit by a young driver and the young driver says "my car didn't do anything", you would want to say the young driver was probably on the phone but you don't really know. Say the driver wasn't on the phone and the car really didn't do anything to keep her from hitting you. What do you tell the police, who do I blame?
I think the positives stand out more then the negatives because they really do help. A elderly with there lisence is on the road and she/he has to slam on there breaks but just couldn't do it fast enough because there so slow and old, the "Smart Car" can help by alerting her/him quickly before she/he sees that everyone has slowed down because of an car accident up ahead that she/he can't see. Teenagers are young and dumb, they are always destracted by there phones, if there eyes are on the phone then whos watching the road? Teenagers get in horriable accidents everyday because they do silly things like texting while driving. The Smart Car can keep them focus and alert them on whats up ahead as well as what's around them. Some Smart Cars won't let you move or do anything untill you put your seat belt on, a seat belt can save you. Smart Cars can save lives.
More of these driverless cars or Smart Cars should be made. They really have brought down the number of accidents. I actually have a Smart car or a smart truck and it doesn't let us down. It will not let you turn on the radio or start the car unless everyone has on there sear belts. It says "welcome" too everytime you get in, such a nice car. Our car has cameras on all four sides of it. the most usefull one is the back camera, it shows everything behind us. We are a big family so when we go grocery shopping, it's a lot of food, sometimes we can't see out the trunk window. How would we know if a car was coming or a family was walking by? What if a dog ran pass or a child ran pass, the Smart Car quickly alerts us by blinking rapidly and making loud beeping noises, the TV in the front of the car shows us what's behind the car or whatever the cameras are showing so my Mom can quickly stop the car so whatever's passing through dosn't get hurt or we don't mess up our nice car. The Smart Car saves lives and money. I can't wait to get my own! | 34
|
3baea30 | I believe a life without cars is a far simplar one. The natural gasses in our atmosphere is being polluted every day by artificial, man made smoke. For example, writer Robert Duffer, highlights the fact that many people are too attached to their cars, thus causing them to drive, equalling out to our polluted atmosphere. The line, "Congestion was down 60 persent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog", said by Duffer, shows how the impact of cars has ruined our clean air and how the use of less cars has cleaned our air in as quick as five days.
Many wonder how our air becomes polluted in the first place. It becomes polluted by something called the green house affect. The green house affect is the theory on how our air is polluted and why smog and contaminated air is all around us. The same way a green house works, by keeping in natural gasses (maybe even polluted ones), plus the solar rays from the ball of fire we call our sun, produces, is the same way that our multi-layed atmosphere works. The UV rays shine down sending heat, and the mixture of pollution from cars and factories, creates a barrier that traps in horrible cemicals and intoxicating fumes. Thus suffocating us on a daily basis. Until someone will do something about.
For example, Vauban, Germany has taken the next step into cleaning our atmosphere, by creating an experimental city, occupied by 5,500 people, none of which use cars. That's right. No cars. Whatsoever. Heidrun Walter, a citizen of the small city in germany, says "When I had a car Iwas always tense. I'm much happier this way." I agree. I believe that a life without cars will be a hard one to adjust to, but if our ancestors were able to do it for hundreds of years, I believe we can do it for another thousand years.
Another great example is the city of Bogota, Colombia. Bogota experienced what is called a "car-free" day, making millions of Colombians hike, bike, skate, and take buses to work. Even despite the rain that seemed to pour down on the people, "The rain hasn't stopped the people from participating," said by Mayor Antanas Mockus. Another participator of the "car-free" event was Carlos Arturo Plaza, who rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife, procalaimed that, "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution."
If we joined these other countries in going "car-free" for a day, maybe making it as often as once a month, I believe we can reduce the levels of air pollution in our atmosphere and all across the country. I believe a life without cars is a far simplar one and a far cleaner one | 23
|
ca42365 | I am against the driverless cars because it would take alot of money to make these cars and they could also be dangerous and cause crashes. If the car needs you to take over and the person isnt paying attencion then it could cause an accident. Another way it could be dangerous is if the car wasnt made right and the technology fails. And maybe people would save money on gas but they would lose alot of money making them because of all the things the car needs like sensors. And if the car did fail whos fault would it be the driver or the manufacturers. So I think making these cars would be complicated because if they were made they would have to make new laws to cover the liability in the case of an accident. So I think it would be better if people just kept driving than to have driverless cars. | 01
|
fa6b1b2 | I think it will be boring becuase you would be to that same place many times. Plus you would see nothing but water. Most likley the boat will smell like a barn full of anamils. Then you would also have to lift all that straw and bags of oat around the boat. You would have to clean up after them. I have 2 cats and I have to clean up after them and lift the bags of cat food. Boy let me you it is a hard job. But the worse part of taking care of my cats is when they get sick all over the floor.
So I dont really see why taking care of 100 some horses would be fun. unless you like horses. Then you would be working on the boat durring a war. that would be dangeras. Plus you would never be home to see your familay unless they came with you. But that probly wouldnt be allowed.
What if you get sea sick? Or a horse gets sick and spreds it around to the other horses? What if the boat springs a leak? A lot of lives will be at risk. Plus what if an animal that you are alergic to comes on the ship? What if the engine breaks and you cant move? Or you run out of food? What would you do? or if the lights quit working while your in the fog or its nigh, and your right in the middle of an ice berg feild? that would be a very rogh time. Or if some one needs medical attention what would you do? or if the caption got sickand it spreded around to the other crew members?
that would be a verytough time. Plus there would be noone to feed the horses becus evrey one would be to weak.
I sure wouldnt Want a job like that!!!!!!!!! | 01
|
0aaae26 | Dear senator, the system we have today used to elect the president, the Electoral College, must be changed. Instead, we should elect the president by means of a popular vote. The Electoral College is unecessary and complicated, and not to mention, outdated. Source 1 says that the Electoral College was established in the Constitution by the founding fathers. This begs the question, how can a system so old still be practical and in use today? This system, therefore, needs to be replaced by a national popular vote.
There are so many things that could go wrong with the Electoral College, such as a tie, in which the decision would go to the House of Representatives. According to Source 2, if this were to happen, than, "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." This, of course, would not reflect the nation's vote, and would anger millions of people. If we elected the president by a popular vote, than the chances of this happening would be significantly more slim.
Another flaw of the Electoral College is that even if a presidential nominee won the popular vote, they could still lose the election. Even though some may argue that this occasion is highly unlikely, this has actually happened twice before, in 1888 and 2000, according to Source 3. "It is entirely possible that the winner of the electoral vote will not win the national popular vote... It happened in 2000, when Gore had more popular votes than Bush yet fewer electoral votes." This is a major flaw of the Electoral College system, which is very frustrating to millions of people. Imagine how you would feel if your candidate won the majority of the nation's vote, but still lost the election because of this horrible voting system. This unfair incidence could be avoided, if only we got rid of the Electoral College, and replaced it with the simple, fair, and straightforward method of the popular vote.
The popular vote is the preferred voting system in the United States. According to Source 2, "over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now." If this is the preferred voting system, and the Electoral College has so many flaws, why not change to using the popular vote? It only makes sense. Not to mention, if the Electoral College were to be thrown out, then maybe more people would come out to vote, which is important. We would then have a more accurate representation of who the nation wants as their leader.
Some may argue that the Electoral College is a good system of electing the president, that the founding fathers knew what they were doing when they established it, and that it "produces a clear winner," (Source 3.) But, the information given above disproves these unvalid arguements. If the Electoral College is such a great system, than why can a nominee who won the majority of the nation's votes still win the election? Will it always produce a clear winner? What about the event of a tie? Or, what about when the "winner" did not win the majority of the votes?
In conclusion, the replacement of this flawed system known as the Electoral College by a national popular vote is absolutely necessary. The people are pushing for a change, and I strongly urge you, senator, to acknowledge this issue. | 45
|
c9dfa00 | Mysterious Face on Mars
In argumentive situation everyone has there own opinions. But with somethings it makes no sense what they're trying to prove. if i was in an argument with someone who thought there was life on the planet Mars i would try to prove how. In space its hard to say theres life in space because scientist have no proof ,no data, or evidence there could be. For there to be a face on mars is hard to believe and for an alien to make it no evidence adds up.
No one really had an exact reaction to the face because all they were assuming there is life on mars. The public started saying theres aliens up there. But the size of the head was two miles and contiued to stare back at everyone. But some people were realistic saying that their was another Martian mesa they were common around cydonia but this image made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. So none of the scientist put alot of thought into it but its the people who escalted the theory and image.
The people who thought there was life the rock formation of how it looked gave an illusion of a head, nose, eyes,and a mouth. The public was so dedicated to proving there was and they could prove it. But some other people and scientist were explaining that there is no life. The more people started talking and hearing about it became a bit more fake and hard to believe. This theory of the face started becoming in Hollywood flms, books, magazines and just made up stories.
Nasa begun to get frusterated and there budget started decreasing. Nasa actually wished it was acient civilizationon mars instead. Scientist started blieving that the face was alien artifact. So they started photographing Cydonia as i priority. When they started photographing more and more they were sorta getting somewhere. But they finally sent out Mars Global Surveyors and flew obver to Cydonia and they took a picture. The picture was ten times better and sharper than the original photos they had with the viking.
Nasa tried to get alot more photos and were gettiing no where becuase of the main reason the weather. But on April 8, 2001 it was a cloudless summer day in Cydonia go a perfect view of the face. Soon Nasa made a conclusion the picture actually looked like the Martian Equivalent. A butte or messa they were landforms common around the American West. Scientist they can finally put an end to the rumor saying theres life over there. Now everyone can know the actual truth with with this whole conspericy.
Getting to an argument with someone about is ther life on mars. Or is there really a face on mars. But i think the argument is clear who would be right. There's just to much evidence proving theres no and what they saw is an illusion of a face. Sometimes you just need proof to an easy fact of what is hard to figure out. | 23
|
7c5cc40 | Exploring Venus some people think that we should explore Venus because Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of Density and size and the closest in distance too. Some people call it the ''Evening Star,'' and is one of the brightest point in the night and even a simple person stargazer can spot it. Also, in our solar system Venus is the second planet from our sun. Since, Venus is simple to see from the distant and safe it has proved to be a very challenging place to examine more closely.
Earth, Venus, and Mars is our other planetary neighbor, and orbits the sun at different speeds.The difference in speed mean it that sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus. Venus is sometimes closer in space terms humans hace sent multiple spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world.
Scientists are even discussing further visits to its surface. Astronomers are amazed by Venus because it has once been the mos earth-like planet in our solar system. While ago Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and may have supported various forms of life.To this day Venus still has some features that are probably analogous to those on earth. Venus has a surface of rocky sediment and includes famaliar features such as valleys, mountains,and craters.
NASA is planning on working in other ways to study venus in parapgraph it states there ideas " For exmple some simplified electroncis 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 condition''.Also they have another idea of using old technology in parapgraph 7 '' Another project is looking back to an old technology called computers these devices were first envisoned in the 1800s and played an important role the 1940s during world war two''. The thrill challenges by Venus has value not only the insight to be gained on the plante itself but also human curiosity.
Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of the density and size and some people call it the evening star and brightest in the night sky. Scientist want to explore on Venus and have curiosity whats on the planet Venus .Also scientist have other ways to explore and find out about the planet Venus. | 01
|
a7154f4 | The Electoral College is a method of voting for President and Vice President that was produced by our founding fathers in the articles of the Constitution. The Electoral College has been in use for centuries, but it is time that we disregard it. The Electoral College was a smart idea in the seventeen and eighteen hundreds, but as our country continues to change, it is necessary to change the way that we elect our leaders. The Electoral College has remained untouched and exactly the same for hundreds of years and this has caused it to be extremely outdated. Not only is it far too outdated and complicated to help our voting process, but the Electoral College does not give the voters voice; instead, it takes it away from them. The Electoral College also can lead to concerning situations that the country and its people do not want to be put in. For these reasons, I strongly encourage you to make the change and switch to election by popular vote.
The question of whether or not to abolish or keep the Electoral College in tact is a heavily debated one, but it is clear that getting rid of the Electoral College will be highly beneficial to the voters of America. The Electoral College was established hundreds of years ago when our Constitution came about and it created a complicated process to elect the President and Vice President of the United States. Our country is changing day by day, and we certainly have made monumental changes since the Electoral College came to be. According to Bradford Plumer, author of, "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong," a poll was taken by Gallup in the year 2000 that showed that less than just forty percent of Americans support the election system that we have now. This proves that it is time for a change and that the system that we currently have in place has been in place for far too long. The everchanging United States of America is in desperate need of an up-to-date election system that fits the current needs of the American people. The Electoral College is not only outdated, but it is also an extremely complex voting method. In an article entitled, "What Is the Electoral College," written by the Office of the Federal Register, it is explained that the Electoral College is a lengthy process that involves the choosing of electors and the issuing of Certificates of Ascertainment after both the people and the electors have voted. The Electoral College does far more harm than good for our country and for this reason especially, I believe that America should begin to elect its Presidents using the popular voting method.
Moreover, the Electoral College should no longer be the voting method of the American people because the people are given no voice with the Electoral College process. In his article, "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong," Bradford Plumer specifically states that the people themselves do not vote for their desired candidate, but instead, they vote for electors who then vote for the more popular presidential candidate. The people should be the ones who vote for the president because they will be the ones who are governed by the president. The Electoral College gives no voice to the people and is considered by many to be a non-democratic way of voting and is often referred to anachronism. Today, it is a struggle to encourage people to vote and be present on election day because no one feels like their vote matters. People say that one vote doesn't make a difference and that there is no point in filling out a ballot if it has no real affect on which candidate is chosen. The Electoral College and the process it established is really just confirming these opinions. People do not feel like they are contributing because when it comes down to it, the electoral votes are the deciding votes. The Electoral College only has a little over five hundred electors that are representing the millions of regular people who show up at the polls on election day. In order to make the people feel like their opinions are being voiced and their voice is being heard, and to increase voter turnout on election day, it is imperative that the country switches over to election by popular vote.
Most importantly, using the Electoral College as our voting method can lead to some serious problems. The replacing of electors that oppose the popular vote result is a problem that comes with using the Electoral College. Not only is it not hard to accomplish, but it has happened before. According to Bradford Plumer in his article, "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong," in the early 1960s, people who favored races being seperated in society were almost able to replace Democratic electors with a new set of electors who supported the opposite party. Also, some corrupt electors who are not pleased with the popular vote will simply vote for whomever they please. Electors clearly have trouble being trusted and there is obviously some extreme dislike for the system we have now. The Electoral College also causes some problems when instances like a tie in the electoral vote come about. In this case, a tie in the Electoral College would be thrown to the House of Representatives, who would then vote for the President. The Electoral College brings about uneccessary problems that could all be avoided if the country converted the way of electing to election by popular vote.
In summation, the Electoral College has been around for hundreds of years, but it is time that the United States makes the change that would improve the way of electing its future Presidents. The Electoral College is outdated and complicated, does not allow the voice of the people to be heard, and leads to uneccessary voting complications. For these reasons, I vehemently feel that we should switch from the Electoral College to election by popular vote. | 45
|
ed76f3e | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author has a very optimisstic look on the chances of touching ground and exploring Venus someday. The author includes the risk that humans would be taking by touching ground on Venus and why humans can not withstand the conditions of the surface of the planet. But, the author counteracts the risks with new ideas of technology that we can use and some alternative ways to get closer to Venus. The article is told in a professional type way by stating the pros and cons of why we haven't been on Venus yet. But, the article also gives evidence of why humans shouldn't let the cons hold humans back from someday making it to Venus's surface safely.
In paragraph 2, the author begins by creating the illusion that Venus is quite simply, "...right around the corner...". He also states that "...Venus is the closet planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the closet in distance too." These two statements alone start the paragraph off with the sense that Venus is a "simple" planet we could explore and that is easier to access distance wise. The author then goes on to tell us in paragraph 3 the dangers of Venus and the reason why humans haven't explored this "simple" plant yet. He then transitions back into an optimisstic tone by curiously explaining the past on Venus and comparing Venus to our home planet of Earth. For example, in paragraph 4, he states that "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." This gives a sense of familiarity to the reader, that Venus is more Earth like than not. The author then goes on with the same optimisstic tone as the previous paragraph and tells us of new ideas being thought of to explore Venus. He informs the reader of the new idea of possibly floating a certain distance above Venus, but then counteracts with why that method still wouldn't be enough to get what scientists want to learn about Venus. The author then also informs the reader of new technology and even old technology from the 1800's that can withstand the conditons, being considered. He also explains how modern technology cannot withstand the conditions of Venus, such as a cell phone or regular computer.
The author then ends with the same optimisstic thinking stating that "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." This gives the reader a sense of curiosity and hopeful thinking by portraying that Venus's obstacles aren't impossible to overcome. The author used this in a way of giving the reader hope that one day, we may be able to finally touch down on Venus. Not only land safely on Venus, but be able to explore it throughly if we keep trying and coming up with new, safe ideas. Maybe not any time soon, but progress is progress and we have to keep trying and thinking in order to achieve our goal of exploring Venus. | 34
|
90d13f9 | Today i will be talking about some good reasons to join the program seagoing cowboys. i will also be trying to get people to sign up for it. I think it would be a great idea to sign up for it.
Here are some reasons why youu should sign up. You could help people out by going and helping with the food supplies, horses, cattle, youn cows, mules,and more. It would be doing a good deade too.
Another good reason is it might be a opportunity that you may never get to take again or if you wanted to try it too see if you like it.
If you are 18 though you could be drafted for military service so if u ever wanted to be apart of the military service it would be a good idea to sign up. Another good reason is if you wanted to just go and look at some new places this would be a good idea because they travel a lot and make a lot of trips.
Going on trips like this to places that need help because they just got out of worl war ll can make you see how much more help thses people need then you do. Another really good idea is that if you ever wanted a chance to help out with animals and stuff and never got a chance to this would be a good idea since they help out with all that.
In this essay i was trying to get people to sign up for seagoing cowboys. I hope the reasons i gave you was helpful enough for people to see that it would be a good idea to go and help out all the people that are in need and to help out with the food and animals and stuff. I hope some of you who read this will sign up. | 12
|
9d05411 | Can I imagine a world with driverless cars? Yes, I can. Do I think they are a smart idea? No, I do not. I do think there are definitely some pros, but the cons are greater. They could have a glitch, cause accidents, and lose control.
I don't think they are a smart invention because they could glitch. What I mean by they could glitch is, they could just stop driving for you without you knowing and die on you. Possibly causing you to crash. Therefore, it is not safe.
Another reason I don't think they are smart is they could lose control. Yes, they do warn you when you need to take over, as it says in paragraph 7 of the article. But, what if you don't hear it? Or, it stops working and it doesn't let you know you need to take over? What are you supposed to do then?
The last reason I think the driverless cars are not smart is they could cause lots of accidents. Yes, normal cars have accidents as well
but I think driverless car accidents would be much worse. They would be worse because of all the computer pieces working in such a big device could cause it to possibly blow up, causing all othe surrounding cars to overheat and blow up themselves, the car could lose control an crash into another car.
Also, the car could also malfunction and do the opposite of what you want it to do. With a normal car, you are in control. So, most of these things are less likely to happen.
Now that I have shared my opinion with you, what do you think? Do you think they're a good invention? In paragraph 8 of the article, it even says safety is their biggest concern. So, what do you think? | 23
|
4a40a03 | I think that driverless car will be pretty cool, but I don't know I would feel safe with them. Eventhrough, the human driver can take over when requires to, I still don't feel safe with a carmera being in the car and the car watching me. Also, if the car does start to break down and the signals don't go off, what will have to that humand driver and other passagers? Will ther be insurance for them? Will it happen to other cars? And what happens when other people found out what happened to the car the broke down and caused an accident? Because I doubt they are going to want to keep driving that driverless car. These are things the manufacturers have to watch out for and many others.
I am not say I don't like that idea of a driverless car, I am just saying that they need to put everyting that can happen into concerteration. Not everyone is going to want a driverless car. Some people are going to want to keep their human driven cars. But I do thing it can be done and it will be done, someday in the near future.
Therefore, driverless cars are not impossible, but I don't think that today is that day is the day. We need to research ever possiblity before it happens. We also need to get othe peoples oppinion on this, such as the elderly. So yes, I do think think driverless cars are a good idea, and hopefully one day soon they will be a part of this world. | 12
|
a034266 | "All of our development since World War II has been centered on the car, and that will have to change." (David Goldberg). Automobiles have been a major impact on today's technology. The creation of the car was a huge turning point in history. Even though this machine has been such an amazing creation, it still causes a lot of damage in society. Cars affect both the environment and humans. The limit of car usage would be great because then the amount of pollution would decrease, less traffic would occur, and it makes way for alternative transportation opportunities.
In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency is promoting "car reduced" communities. The reduction of cars can lead to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. According to Elisabeth Rosenthal, cities are choking due to the increase number of emissions. Paris had hit near-record pollution which lead to an enforced ban of partial driving to clear the air of the global city. Acoording to Robert Duffer, Paris typically has more smog than other European capital. In Bogota, Colombia there is a day called Day Without Cars, there they only let buses and taxis drive around and their goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog. If anybody goes against this, they would have to pay $25. "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza. This day became really big in Colombia and improved their cities' overall look.
Furthermore, the limitation of car usage would decrease the amount of traffic. Traffic is an on-going issue in everyday life. People arrive late to work or school or wherever they need to go due to traffic or an accident. During the Day Without Cars in Colombia, millions of Colombians hiked, biked, skated, or took buses, leaving the city devoid of traffic jams. Traffic jams are usually stressful so if that gets reduced with the limitation of car usage, then stress levels get reduced as well, causing mentally healthier people. Traffic jams also occur due to accidents. Car accidents are one of the many reasons why people end up in hospitals, get sued, get hurt, or loose money. With the limitation of car usage, all these issues will be resolved.
Moreover, new alternative transportation vehicles can come into play with the reduction on car usage. There is a plan where they want suburbs to play a much larger role in a new six-year federal transportation bill to be approved. Also, during the Day Without Cars, the goal is to promote alternative transportation. Lately, new transportation vehicles have been discovered and created. Some include, a flying car, an elevated train that gets you from point A to point B in seconds, and new hybrid cars. Technology keeps progressing every single day. Today people may be driving their normal SUVs but by tomorrow, they could be drivng the new high-speed flying Ferrari. People are always keeping in mind while creating these machines about how it will affect the community and the consumers. Since it is obvious that the environment isn't as healthy as it was before, they must make sure that these machines limit pollution and emissions that affect the world negatively.
Overall, the limit of car usage would be a good thing. As time goes on people may not even need cars anymore to move from place to place. If everyone works together to solve these issues then the world would become a much better place. The final goal is to get rid of all the bad emissions and issues and just stick to what is best for the environment. When the environment is healthy, the humans are healthy. | 34
|
7b8a8d4 | Do you think people should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program? People should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program beacaue of these three reasons because they would get to go on many adventures, also because they would get to meet new people, and also they would get to experience new places.
They should join the program because they would get to go on many adventures. The text states it was a great adventure for luke.
also if they join the program they would get to meet new people. The text stats "it made me more aware of people other countries". The text also states that lead him to keep meeting new people.
Last if they join the program they would get to experience new place. the text states that they had to go to china. The text also states that they had to ride on the Atlantic Ocea.
And that is why I think more people should join the program. beacause of those three reasons. | 12
|
d48339a | Luke didn't paticipate in the Seagoing Cowboys because he hat to stay at home. And because he had just graduated from high school. he didn't think it was nessisary to go and he had a leave at home even tho he had a family at home. He didn't want to just leave them at home with out him. Becuase he had no one to watch them when they was at home alone with no one to talk to. He desided to stay and not go so he can be there with them and he was going to pertect them from harmes way. he loved his family to much to just leaver to join a cowboy group with people her didn't know at all so he said No and that he was staying with them. Because if he would have left it would proboly change ther life and his forever. they didn't want to stay home by there self for a long time he wanted to stay and help them out around there house and other stuff. And because it was to danges for him any way that is why he didn't want to go. And he just wanted to stay and not put himself in danger because it was a war and he didn't want to die and never return. | 01
|
144515c | the facial action coding system that enables computer to identify human emotion. i think its a good idea because you can tell if someone is upset. we should intall this technology because see can see if any of your sudents understand the lessionn or the homework that you give them.
its six basic emotions happiness,surpise,anger,disgust fear,and sadness- and than associted each with characteristic moveements of the facial muscles like raies your eyebrows when your are surpised your obicularis oris ariund the mouth tigtens your lip to show your anger you can prbably tell how a friend is feeing base on ther face. most people would have trouble know for face expressing.
in the mona lisa demonsttration is really inteded to bring a smile to your face while the computercsn do so much better. the computer can show your mood of you at the time say if you were lokking at something like a video and you like some eles would pop up on the computer and bring another one if you were to studied human anatomy would help them paint facial muscle precisely enough to convery specific emotions. is all about those muscular action units in the face. emotion moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions but also may even help produce them | 12
|
eeffdbf | From electric cars to deisel semi-trucks, automobiles can hurt the enviornment and people living in that eniviornment. The limiting use of cars can help everyone in some way. It can also save nations millions of dollars to spen on things other than fuel. the world will be a lot better wihtout the usage of cars.
Cars will alaways be a part of the human race, but have you ever had the thought of not using one anymore? In source number 3, it tells about a car-free day in Bogota, Columbia. "It`s a good opportuniy to take away stress and lower air pollution," said business man Carlos Arturo Plaza, who was riding a two seat bike with his wife. Using cars can give you a lot of stress behind the wheel because you never know whats going to happen and if you will live another day to drive your car again. In Paris, after days of near-record pollution, they enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city, according to source number 2. France has a tax policy that favors diesels over gasoline. Because of the heavy usage of diesel engines paris typically has more smog than other European capitals.
Passenger cars are responsible for 12% of greenhouse gas emissionsin Europe and up to 50% in some car-intensive areas in the United States. In Vauban, Germany, an upscale community is letting people who have given up their cars to live there. Source number one state that 70% of the people who live there do not own cars and 57% sold a car to move there. "When I had a car I was always tense. I`m much happier this way," said Heidrun Walter, as she walked verdant streets where the swish of bicycles and the chatter of wandering children drown out the occasional distant motor. Recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by source number 4 shows. If the pattern persists it will have beneficial implications for carbon emissions and the enviornment. People who stopped commuting may find less reason to resume the habit.
Car usage, the poisen to the enviornment, is a big issue. Wealthy business men who commute an hour to work, soccer moms, and even kids driving to school all rely heavily on car usage. If the issue of limiting vehicles isn`t solved, it must be watched closlely for the coming geneartions. It will continue to effect the human race by the disposing of greenhouse gases, until we figure out a way to limit the usage of cars. | 23
|
7797857 | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the possible dangers it may present. Traveling to new places of our world is something that can help better our overall konwledge of things and expand our thoughts. The most intriguing and beneficial tasks usually have the most downsides to them but that doesn't mean we should simply walk away from them. Even though visiting and touching down on planet Venus produces many dangers, it can still expand our imagination and innovation, complete something that has never been done before, and find better ways to travel there safely.
Touching down on the planet Venus will most likely have several deadly dangers to it. "On the planet's surface, temperature averages over 800 degrees fahrenheit." That is notable to be over the limit of what a body can withstand even with the astronaut suit on. "Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes and frequent lightning strikes." These conditions aren't like any type of bad weather that we have here on Earth because they can much more easily take the life of people. Visiting the unusual planet of Venus does have many downsides within it, but that doesn't mean we should automatically stop trying to come up with ideas and conclusions and how to get there safely.
Our travels within Earth and beyond it should not be stopped just because of a few flaws. Visiting various new places can only help expand both our imagination and innovation. "human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors." Us as humans should learn that we must take risks every once in awhile if we want to expand our knowledge on various important things. "Numerous factors contribute to Venus's reputation as a challenging planet for humans to study, dspite it's proximity to us." This reasoning should make us want to strive for more factual evidence on Venus and pursue our understandings. Learning more about the planet could possibly help make new advancements that would increase our overall knowledge.
Sending a spaceship to Venus with living astronauts inside of it is something that has never been done before. Astronauts should want to make a change to that record because it is good to participate in something that's new every once in awhile. "Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours." It is scary to think about all of the possible threats this task has to offer since it is known that "not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades" but you also have to think about all of the good things that taking part in this mission may bring. It is okay for people to take risks and step out of their comfort zones because doing this will help our society strive as a whole.
Learning more about Venus in general and the flaws it has will continue to better our information and help us create things that will get us on to the planet safely. "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of the Venus would allow scientist to float above the fray." This idea of blimp-like travel will allow there to be a safe environment for the ones exploring because it would keep them up and away from the unsafe ground conditions. Another approach that NASA has already made is "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." This idea would possibly only be beneficial for a short period of time but it will still allow us to view a newer part of our world. Once NASA and other teams start to gather up more information from the many trips they take, then it will be much easier to find a safer route to Venus.
Despite all of the dangers that are presented by traveling to Venus, our world would be more advanced in our understandings of some of our neighboring planets. Going to new places and taking risks in our lives can potentially do great things for us like improve our techonological advancements, help us come up with better conclusions and all together just make record history. It's not a bad thing to do something different for a change because you never know what incredible possibilities it may lead to. | 34
|
5aa1385 | In the article "The challenge of Exploring Venus," Venus is the second closest planet to our sun, it has the same density and size as Earth. Venus is also one of our neighbor planets along with Mars but the planets Mars and Venus orbit around the sun at different speeds than Earth. The atmosphere on Venus is 97% carbon dioxide, the clowds are made of corrosive sulfuic acid, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times grater than Earth's.
The conditions for any thing living on this planet are impossible for any human to visit this planet. The text states "A thick atmospher of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere... temperature average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit...the atmospheric pressure is 90 times grater than what we exerience on our own planet." No one would survive long enough to touch the surface of this planet. The text also states "such an environment would crush even a submarine accustumed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals."
This proves the danger of this planet and how intrested we are to learn more about it.
Some Astronomers think that Venus was just like earth a long time ago. They think that Venus use to be capable of sustainging life just like earth. the text states "Astonomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system..." The text also stetes "Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like earth." The Astronomers even found some evidence that there could have been lif on this planet. The text states "The planet has of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters." This may be proof that Venus may have had life billions of years in it's past.
This is what makes Venus so intresting and so dangerous. Hopefully we learn more about the planet in the near feauture and have advanced enough technology to visit the planet. | 12
|
ca44137 | Would you ever consider exploring Venus? In my opionion I would explore Venus because it would be a great experience and also it would be a challenge to do something that outrageous. Venus is a worthy pursuit because you can discover so much and the story states that the planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys,mountains,and craterse. In the story "The Challenge of Exploring Venus it talks about what the planet Venus and it gives information about Venus,and also if the author would explore it. In the story Venus is the second planet from the sun 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. Earth,Venus,and Mars,our other planetary neighbor,orbit the sun at different speeds. These differences in spped mean that sometimes we are closer to Mars and other times to Venus. Becasue Venus is sometimes right around the corner-in space terms-humans have sent mumerous spacecraft to lan d on this cloud-draped world.
The story also gives a lot of information about Venus and how challenging exploring Venus really is. Such as,A thick atmosphere of alomost 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 Fahrenheit,and the atmospheric pressure in 90 times greater that what we experience on our own planet.
However,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 travel on Earth and beyond should not be limited by danger and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation.
In conclusion discovering Venus and it being outrageous the planet is dangerous but like the story says "Earth and beyond should not be limited by danger and doubts but should expanded to meet the very edges of imagination,Despite of this planet being dagerous exploring a planet is also a one in a life time thing and doing something like this is advangerous and it something you can remember for ever. | 23
|
2529033 | Dear Participants Thinking About Joining TheSeagoing Cowboys,
Well, hello. My name is Luke Bomberger, a participant onboard the SS Charles W. Wooeter. If you're reading this letter, then that means that you're thinking about joining the Cowboys. This can be a great oppertunity to go explore the big bright beautiful world, but know this. You're not just going to go sighteeing. Your going to help people in europe and China happier. Now let us begin with the best parts of the trip.
The first thing that you need to know about our little band of participants is that we all have eachother's backs. We help eachother with our jobs and have fun together. All that we do is help our cargo (horses) get to our destination saftly. These horses are supposed to be feed and watered three times a day. We have all the oats and water we need tokeep th horses alive. Don't thionk that all that we do is deliver and feed horses. After the horses are loaded up onto the destination then we all get to ave fun. We have table tennis tournaments, paly volleyball, and much more.
That's all tht I have for you right now. If you want to learn more about this bnd of participants, come and find us and jion us. We aren't just looking for men, we are looking for wemen too. Just find us, sign up, and have fun. I hope to see you there.
Your friend,
Luke Bomberger | 23
|
b015474 | You should go to the Seagoing Cowboys program. You should go there, because you get to see all over the world. For xample that shows you get to go all over the world is that, Luke went to China, the Atlanic Ocean, and the United States of America. Another example is that you get to go with your friends sometimes to trips on a boat, like when Luke went to Europe with Don. Also Luke went to go to different Countries and States, that's way more fun other then just saying in one country and state.
You should also go to Seagoing Cowboys program, because you get to see different animals and plants, that where unloaded on the boat from different states and countries. Maybe if you went to this program you would get to see different animals and plants from different States and Countries. Plus Luke crossed the Atlantic and Pacific twice to help people affected by World War ll. Sometime these program can be fun,and sometimes it can show you lessons ,and sometimes you just have to help people that doesn't have a life like you.
In conclusion, this shows why some kids for example Luke went to the Seagoing Cowboys program. These kids went to this program, because it is fun and exciting. This program is an opporunity of a lifetime, it gives you a ton of fun and excitment, and it can help you learn and get better in school, and education.
Do you think the Seagoing Cpwboys program is fun, and would you go to the Seagoing Cowboys program? | 23
|
a1c6553 | I disagree with driverless cars. Driverless cars are not a very smart idea, just becuase Google has made driverless cars since 2009 they have drove over half million miles without a crash, but Google cars are not driverless they alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of a driveway or dealing with something bad happing near them. The Google driverless cars are not so driverless.
My thoughts about the driverless cars is what happens if the car crashes whos fault is it the person in the car or the manufacturer? What if we get driverless cars what is going to happen to insurance for cars insurance people will lose money and if the car did crash its more money out of your pocket to fix it insted the insurance people having to deal with some payment. Car manufactures like BMW, Audi, ext. have made more of there cars safe for people and I do not think making them driverless would be safe. What if the car goes nuts and the driver has no control?
I feel that if we get driverless cars more people will lose there life then without them. We can not always relie on driverless cars or the technology becuase one day we will not have it. So I think we need to just drop the whole driverless cars and work more on safety. | 12
|
3df743d | In the passage " The Challenge of Explorinng Venus ", the author belives that we should explore venus even if there are hazards. we should explore venus because it is the only planet that is a like twin,that we will gain insight on the planet,and that human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimadating endavors.
venus is one of planetary neighbors meanig that it is one of the closest planets to earth. Scientest often call venus our twin. In paragraph four,sentence 3 scientes also say that, " Venus was probaly covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." With this being said they could moniter venus and get it running like how it use to be if we can we can get up there and be there long enough. If we are able to do that Scientest could probaly move life over to Venus.
If insight is gained over Venus we could create new life or even move life over to Venus. With the right technology we could create a habitat that we can live on. If we did acomplish thus our life could change forever. We could reduce the amount of poultion, control the population, and if ever needed we could move to a diffrent planet. With posibiltes like this we could change our life and how we would live forever. This could embark ideads of us going to mars and trying the same thing.
If we did this it could show that we can make other planets an enviorment that we could live on. Such as mars and other palnets. Pepole would be inspired to colonize another planet. Mars also as earth like features you can grow props there and do many other things. With great minds on the project anything is posible.
in conclusion, with the thought of exploreing venus because it is the only planet that is a like twin,that we will gain insight on the planet,and that human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimadating endavors. Are all valid points because if all these things are posible than anything is posible within our planet and with outher planets. | 23
|