essay_id
stringlengths 7
7
| full_text
stringlengths 720
20.5k
| score
class label 6
classes |
|---|---|---|
e2f214c | Google has had cars that can drive independently under specific conditions since 2009. Google cofounder Sergey Brin envisions a future with a public transportation system, where fleets of driverless cars form a public-transport taxi system. I believe this would be efficient use of driverless cars and it would be a large improvement to our transportation system today. "Driverless" cars still need drivers, or managers, to control the car, which would provide more jobs in large cities. Driverless cars would be able to use half of the fuel of todays taxis while offering far more flexibility with carpooling.
In 2013, BMW announced the development of "Traffic Jam Assistant." The car can handles driving functions at speeds of up to 25 mph, while touch sensors make sure the driver keeps hold of the wheel in case of complex driving issues or a collision or near-collision. None of the cars developed today are completely driverless. They can do basic driving functions such as steering, accelerating, amd braking themselves, but are designed to notify the driver when he/she should take the wheel. This means the human driver must remain alert in case he/she should have to take over.
We could have large ammounts of cars in cities like this. It would provide jobs for the managers of the cars, while ammounting to less accidents on the road. All the smart cars could interact and communicate to each other to alert managers to accidents or taffic problems ahead. This technology could also be used to prevent more collisions.
Google has had cars that can drive independently under specific conditions since 2009. Google cofounder Sergey Brin envisions a future with a public transportation system, where fleets of driverless cars form a public-transport taxi system. I believe this would be efficient use of driverless cars and it would be a large improvement to our transportation system today. "Driverless" cars still need drivers, or managers, to control the car, which would provide more jobs in large cities. Driverless cars would be able to use half of the fuel of todays taxis while offering far more flexibility with carpooling. | 23
|
3aaa9c1 | The argument that the face is a natural landfrom is true because there is evedince in the passage backing up my fact.
First he took three pictures one in 1976,1998 and 2001 in 1976 they didnt have good camera he just showed the outline of the butte or mesa landform. In 1998 it was in the winter for the planet was so it change the outlook on the butte. 2001 was the best by far it was during the summer and it was the most recent one taken
Second in 1976 the camera was even close as it is now.
In 1998 the camera made a big step and made the image have the best resolution having a stuning 1.56 meter compared to the 43 meters in 1976 they only problem it was in winter and it was really hazy. So in 2001 they took another image it was not even close to ether of the photos in 1976 or 1998
It made it look like it was a face but thank to better cameras we can see that it is not a face it was just a butte. | 12
|
6162b21 | I agree with the author wanting to explore more Venus. Venus is often referred as Earth's "twin," and its the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size. If a spacecraft landed and survived for more than a several hours we might get enough informtion to answer that question almost every scientists asks "can there be life on another planet." Even though Venus being almost 97 percent carbon dioxide, temperatures average over 800 degrees fahrenheit. The atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our planet. Even though Venus has a horrible environment astronomers are fascinated by it, because it may well once have been the most earth like planet in our solar system. Venus still having like Earth features like, it having a rocky sufrace acting like valleys, mountains, and craters. Futhermore, Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit. It's a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) came up with an idea of humans being able to study Venus in a safe way. Scientists being able to hover over the planet, but that can go so far in giving us information about the planet. The good thing about that is that it's survivable for humans in the "not so easy conditions" of Venus. The curiosity of humans will most likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. Our travels on earth and beyond shouldn't be limited by the dangers and doubts, but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation.
These are some of the reasons to back up why I agree with the author wanting to explore more Venus. | 23
|
7847f8f | The face you think was created by aliens was not, because we have no evidence of aliens throught all of our travels in space. The face is just a natural landform on Mars. If you think that NASA wants to hide this for their research your wrong. If NASA released that there was alien lifeforms on Mars their funding would be increased by a lot. The photos may look likes the face was created by something, but it is a naturally formed mesa. It looks like a face because the shadows form what look to be like eyes, a nose, and a mouth. If there have been spacecrafts surveying the land on Mars then why have there not been any pictures sent back of alien lifeform.
If the face was created by aliens where, the aliens should be nearby unless they can travel faster than anything the Earth has. The face could not have been created by aliens because there is not any lifeform on Mars that is not microscopic. We havesurveyed Mars several times and not seen anything proving alien liforns except for this face. If there are aliens then there should be more evidence than a face, which is most likely a mesa. If there are aliens and they built this face, it had to mean something to them. If the face meant something to the aliens then they would be found near it. The Middle Butte in the Snake RIver Plain of Idaho is a lave dome that takes the place of an isolated mesa and is about the same height as the face on Mars.
In 2001, the Mars Global Surveyor came close enough to the face to get a good picture. It was a cloudless day, so the picture was very clear. Each pixel measured to about 1.56 meters. The Viking 1 photo measured about 43 meters per pixel. There were no markings on the face from an alien lifeform.
The Mars Global Surveyor looks straight down on the planet taking pictures and sending them to NASA. Since the Mars Global Surveyor only does 2.5 km-wide strips it does not pass over the face very often. Even though it does not pass over the face very often the Mars Global Surveyor covers a lot of land and has not seen any aliens. You have the right to still believe that the face as created by alien lifeform, but I hope these facts changed your point of view on the situation. | 34
|
57649d1 | Every four years there is an election held for the next president. Citizens across America vote for the canidate they best see fit to be president. Many may not know but there is another process other than voting to select a president. When people vote for a president, they are actually voting for a elector. That elector then votes for the next president, and this is called The Electral College System. The Electoral College System should no no longer be part of the election process, but instead have election by popular vote for the president of the United States.
When a president is elected it does not just effect the government, but also the people of America. The president that is chosen makes decisions for the people, and that is why so many people vote on who will be making those decisions. The Electoral College System greatly effects that vote of presidency. In The Indefensible Electrol Collage: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong by Pradford Plumer states that "Voters vote not fo the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the persident". People are not getting the chance to vote, because the electors are the ones voting for them. The people should have a turn to vote for the next president.
Many people today are all toward the Electoral College System. People think that it is a great way and very helpful when it comes to the elections. The Electorical College seems fair to some people, even if the president most voted for was not elected like back in 2000. The electors to them help find a new president with other electors in Congress. The electors even have the chance to vote for the other canidate even if the people do not vote for that canidate.
However many people may be towards the system, but others are also against it. The electors go to Congress and vote for the next president. It is even possible that the canidate most voted for by the people could not be voted for by the electors. The electos haave the finall sya, even if that means not voting for who the people are voting for. This is an issue that should no longer be, but instead have popular vote.
The Electoral College Sysytem should be removed from the presidential election, and replaced with popular vote. The Electoral College System does not help, but prevents the canidate most voted for to be ellected. Popular vote from the people should decide who the next president of the United States should be. | 23
|
187c555 | the use technology more useful to read the emotional expressions of the students is valuable is because teaches the students spmething that they never known.
the articles making mona lisa smile is a claim is because the using of technology to read students emotional expressions makes them think about how can technology so our emotional expressions and the only way to do that is by seeing a friends feeling and by seeing the facial muscles move and precisley enough to show it .
foor computers to show emotions it has to see the 44 major muscles model and how they move when they react to the emotions if the major muscles model don't move in the computer then we won't be able see the emotions .
the ways you can sse if youre showing a emotion is going to a mirror and see waht is happening to show emotion iis raie your lips at the corners of your mouth, then squint your eyes slightly to produce wrinkling at the corner of yours eyes, whild holding that raise the outer parts of the cheeks up toward your eyes. and thats what can to do to show emotions.
In conclusion, technology that is called FACS can show huaman emotions byy showing what creates them by show the mona lisa painting and what caused her to smile and this considers this valuable to the student so they can learn about this. | 01
|
eafc6cc | Dear Mr. Senator,
I would like to advice you that keeping the electoral collage is a good idea.
Based on all of the voting and advances it has progressed. It has done an easily better job for everyone. Demorcats,republicans and citizens advance this and make it a better world to live in. it restores some of the weigtht in the political balance that large states by population sources say. In other words electoral collages avoid the problem of elections in which no candidate recieves a majority of the votes cast.
For instance,citizens are what president canidates are more interested in because those are the most important people to be aware off. Especially since their the reason for your presidential election or career. It requires a presidential canidate to have trans-regional appeal.
When no region has enough electoral votes to elect a president. it is now a best offer to have electoral collages. Reasons why people dont want electoral collages method of selecting the president may turn off potential voters for a canidate who has no hope of carrying thier states.
In addition, voters in presidential elections are peoplewho want to express a political preference rather than people who think that a single vote may decide an election. The electoral collage is a process,not a place. Its process consists of the selection of the electors,the meeting of the electors where they vote for president and vice president. The counting of the electoral votes by congress. With that being it is not a decision that us citizens are choosen to do.
Sincerly,Genesis Diaz | 12
|
fdd251e | Driverless cars are coming and are closer than we think. Driverless cars are a phenomenal idea becauase they're innovative,all major car compaines are moving toward the driverless way and they're safe. This essay will disscuss these three reasons on why driverless cars are a phenomenal idea.
First driverless cars are overwhelmingly innovative. It states in the passage "Originally,many futurists believed the key to developing self-driving cars someday wasn't so much smarter cars as smarter roads". This is putting into perspective that even futurists didn't believe it was possible but Google has achieved this monument to perfection. Also in the ariticle it says "founder of the Google Car project, believes that the technology has finally begun to catch up to the dream". As the original founder of this project he has even reached the level of innovation that he has been striving and working for since 2009.
Secondly alot of major car companies are striving for making their product driveless. For example in the passage it conveys "Tesla has projected a 2016 release for a car capable of driving on autopilot 90 percent of the time". This is shownig how a major car company as innovative as Tesla is going to release a self driving car of their own. In that same paragraph it informs "Mercendes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by 2020". Showing that even some of the luxury brands and the major car compaines are releasing a driverless car. Showing how they agreee with where the future is going and how much of a phenomenal idea it is.
Lastly, the driverless cars are safe and take limitless precatious to stay safe. It describes in the article "Google's modified Toyota Prius uses position-estimating sensors on the roof, a video camera mounted near the rearveiw mirror, four automotive radar sensors, a GPS receiver, and an inertial motion sensor". This derscribes how many preperations is took for the car to be very safe.
In conclusion I have disscussed the three reasons why self-driving cars are a good idea. The reasons eing they're innovative, major car companies are doing it and they're safe. What do you think about the cars? | 23
|
eab9ae4 | The counterclaim: Our travels on earth and beyond sold not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation. The evidence is in paragraph 6 many reasearchers are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to or knowledge of venus.
In the article "The challenge of exploring venus", Mostly talks about venus is worthy pursuit despite the dangers it could be .
One reason why it's dangerous is because no one have maded to venus. For example in paragraph 2 in sentence 5 it states, "Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reasons, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours". Another example in paragraph 2 sentence 6 it states, "maybe the issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on venus in more than three decades.
A second reason why it's dangerous is that NASA is exprienceing new object to see if they could land in venus. For example in paragraph 5 in the second sentence it states "NASA possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of venus." A second example on why NASA is using objects is in paragraph five sentence four it states "A vechicle hovering over venus would avoid to unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way".
A third reason why it's dangerous is that humans are not believing and wanting to go to venus. For example in paragraph eight it states "Striving to meet the challenge presented by venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but humans curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endevors".
"The challenge of exploring venus" Is worthy pursuit despite of danger for these reasons, Alstranouts not landing, NASA making a new object to try to land, and humans not wanting to believe what's happeing and wanting to go to venus. I perdict that those were why the author suggest that studying venus could be dangerous. | 12
|
c107670 | The author does a poor job of explaining why Venus should be explored, despite risks. First, they introduce Venus' poor, inhabitable conditions. Then, they go on to suggest an idea that isn't anything but a dream. Finally, they admit that the previous "solution" won't even work.
The introduction to Venus in paragraph three, is anything but inviting. The author tells the reader that most of Venus's atmospher is 97% CO2 or carbon dioxide. That is a gas that humans exhale and it's extremely deadly when there is too much. For example, carbon dioxide poisoning. That kills people. It doesn't get better. The author then goes on to explain that the atmospheric pressure is even survivable. The author writes,
"... And the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet."
This line basically tells the reader that if an actual human were to even land there, they would most likely die immediately. If not for the suffocation that would happen because of the excessive amount of carbon dioxide. The author even says, in paragraph two, a robot couldn't survive Venus for, "more than a few hours." How well would a human do? This tells the readers of all the dangers, not even offering a benefit, other than to "meet the challenge."
Not only does the the author state all the reasons why we shouldn't go to Venus, the solution they have found isn't really a good one. In paragraph five, the author writes, "Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape... Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." The author starts with the word "imagine," telling the reader that this idea most likely isn'y even an option. The word imagine has the connotation of something you would want to happen, not neccesarily something that will. They then go on to say that the conditions weren't easy, but at least people could survive.
That sounds great, right? Wrong.
This so-called "solution" isn't even a solution.
In paragraph six, the author admits that looking at the planet safely hovering wasn't going to be enough. "More importantly, researchers cannot take samples," The auhtor explains. "Of rock, gas, or anything else, from a distance."
This line proves that the the vehicle suggested previously is not even going to work. It will put people in "survivable" conditions for basically nothing.
So, the author does a very poor job of supportung the idea that Venus is worthy of studying, despite the dangers. They list reason after reason, of why that is a bad idea and the one solution they find, they admit won't work. | 45
|
f3b4324 | The face is just a natural landfrom because in space there is a lot of astroids. Astroids could of hit the planet many times and have made a shape that looks like a human face. Aliens couldn't of made it because it's two miles wide from end to end at it would take alot of time. Scientists at NASA figureed out it was another Martian mesa, common around Cydonia, only that had an unusual shadow.
Conspiracy theorists belive that NASA is just trying to hide aliens on mars. Many people wanted to see the picture of the face formation, but later reaveling that it was just a natural landform. Scientists said that it wasn't easy for them to get another look at the face beacuse the MGS only scans in 2.5 km strips and they don't past over it often. Later NASA took another picture and the MGS took a photo using the cameras best resolution. | 12
|
d46c11d | I would love for you to jopin his career in Sesagoing Cowboys . We aren't just some npeople who sail the seas right Charels ,"Yep". if you care about animals as much as I do you would join us today. These animals need someone like you . Thec greatest thing is you meet so many people .
If you do join I hope you beat my record for most missions completed 9. It's only nine becase it takes years to cross the ocean . On this ship you can be your self . And did Italk about the trips you take . The only thing you know about the trips you don't know the trip itself .
My favorite parts is the traveling and the games after the trip .
Like boxing baseball ,volley ball , and more . On the way you are always with friends and animals . So , now you get to keep the animals as pets .I now got one queston for you are you ready to join . | 12
|
c57bd0d | Germany,France, and Columbia,all have something in common, they are cutting down on car pollution. Car polluton is rising problem in the world, making up almost fifty percent of the United States' pollution and twelve percent in Europe. From making cars distinct from everday life to banning all cars for a day,these countries are trying to cutdown on the car pollution build up.
One of the biggest feats in trying to cutdown car pollution is making it an unusal thing in everyday life for a city in Germany known as VAUBAN.This city does not ban cars but even then only about thirty percent of residents in this city own a car and fifty-seven percent have sold their own cars to move here. This city is a home to a mere 5,500 residents, but they all live with in a rectangular square mile. This shows that it is possible to live without cars as personal transport and still be with in reach of stores, work and home.
Another city taking a big step in the fight against car pollution is the well known city of Paris,France. Paris has enforce a partial driving ban in its streets to hopefully clear or cut the air of pollution. The city has made an odd law, "On Monday motorists with even-numbered license plates were ordered to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine($31). The same would apply to odd-numbered plates the following day." When this law was first enforced nearly 4,000 drivers were fined accoding to Reuters. This law was meant to exterminate the smog becuase the city was rivaling one of the most polluted cities in the world, Bejing,China.
One of the other cities creating a anti-car pollution act is Bogota, Columbia. The city of Bogota has created an annual "Day without cars" which is fine with the residents. Instead of cars residents use bikes and buses and other modes of transportation to travel around the city. This event has been rubbing of on a fellow cities in the area. The cutdown on pollution here is slight but will slowly make an impact over time when this annual "Day without cars" begins to take place in multiple other cities, hopefully, instead of these three cities.
Avoiding car usage is a difficult feat to an everyday car user but if you can avoid it then it can really effect the enviorment in a positive way. Making a day for no cars or at least a small amount of car usage can really impact the enviorment. This movement has even begun to start in the United States and hopefully will continue from then on into the future when we eventually have a whole lot of fueless cars for everyone to drive in. | 34
|
95b26a0 | The voting system, known as the Elctoral College, is still being disputed today. There has been many occassion where it has been tried to be elimanted. Some voters think that it is an anachronism. They don't realize that it is a well thought-out voting system. It helps gives more opportunity to smaller states and makes elections alot easier.
The Electoral College, is basiclly a winner-take-all system. Where whichever President has majority of elctoral votes, wins, no matter what the popular vote was. It gives opportunity to smaller states. The way that the Elcetoral College works, is that your state is entitled to a number of electors, a Congressional delegation based on state population, as explained in "What Is the Electoral College?" For an example, the District of Columbia, is "...treated like a state for purposes of the Electoral College..." It gives the District of Columbia, almost like a voice, saying, "Hey I'm small, but my votes matter."
The Electoral college, helps alot with making the elections easier. The election season is already stressful and pressuring to begin with. Waiting for results of who the next President might be, raises anxiety to the roof. The Electoral College, helps very much to predict what the votes may be. Why? "Certaintiy of Outcome" as titled in, "In Defense of the Electoral College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President". The share of the Electoral College also depends on the popular vote of the state, even thought they are two different things. Even a very slight plurality can cause a "landslide electoral-vote". Most of the time, the President that has the most electoral votes, has aswell most popular vote.
I know that the Electoral College isn't the most perferred method. But it is a secure way of voting. It makes the election alot easier and gives chances to smaller states. It shouldn't be abolished like Bob Dole said. Lets keep it. | 23
|
413fa86 | Imagine visiting a planet like ours, maybe it was just like ours at a point where it could have living animals, water, and maybe even trees. Venus has the type of look because it the only plant that looks more like our planet the Earth.
First, on paragraph two of the article called " The Challenge of Exploring Venus" it says that "Venus is often reffered to as Earths twin, its the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size". This shows on how cool it would be too going into a planet that we havent been to and maybe it can be like ours, its a worthy try even though dangerous thing happen because we never know what we could find.
Also, because in paragraph 4 it states that "Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit" this shows on how close it is to Earth and its worth a try trying to go there.
Lastly,it would give out new oppurtunities to go into other planets, because "venus is the second planet from the sun" and this shows and how dangerous it could be, but if we make it we can see stuff like the sun and notice stuff we cant see thru a camera. also, it would give out more conficence of going into space and going into a diffirent planet.
In conclusion, People should go into Venus because it show on new opportunities and find new things we didnt know about. | 12
|
2b33aff | Cars can be very dangerous to this day. So many people are get hurt driving in cars or driving the cars. There are so many things cars can do that can hurt you or before you know it you're dead. Would you want to be that person that gets hurts because the car can drive by itself? I don't think anyone would want to be that person hurt because of a car messing up and it wouldn't be your fault one bit. I would rather take responibility on getting hurt or dead then knowing I can't do anything about it because my car is driving itself.
My position on driverless cars are that you should drive the car yourself. In paragraph 7 it says, "This means the human driver must remain alert to be ready to take over when the situation requires." Most humans aren't alert driving by themselves let alone being alert when something goes wrong and not knowing when it will be. Technology is really good today, but it is also can go bad whenever it wants to. You don't want to be put in a sitituation where you don't know when something bad is going to happen and you aren't paying attention so you can't do anything about it, next thing you know you're in the hospital or even worse in a coma. I just think having a fancy car that can drive itself is not worth getting hurt over. It's really not. In paragraph 8 it considers, "Wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?" It's not about having fun driving. It's about getting to one destination to another. You can put your family in danger.
Having a car to drive itself it's not worth getting hurt over. Technology is really good in all, but it could always go wrong not knowing when. Cars are already dangerous today. I think it would produce more reckless drivers and more accidents around the world. Most people are never focused on the road all the time, and when you have a car that can drive by itself you have to be focused on the road at all times. There are still a lot of postive things to this. It's not all negative. I just think there are more negative than postive. | 12
|
3739677 | The topic of driveless cars is very controversial. Some people say that driveless cars will be hazard to society, and will only endanger more people all over the world so they should not be manufactured. Conversly, others believe they are a necessity and will be a great advance in technology for the future. I gravitate towards the former opnion of driveless cars becoming chaotic and troublesome, and they should not be developed. Driveless cars should not be invented because humans will be too distracted to handle them, the health and safety of pedestrians would be threatened, and the cars are not completely driveless.
In today's current society, people are engrossed in social media and digital communication. We are addicted to looking at Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, and texting our friends and family that it has infected our daily lives. It has even contiminated our driving. People find their phones irresitable, and they can not even manage to restrain themselves from swiping up their phones to look at the newest message while driving. This leads to casaulties and injuries that are the result of the driver not having the ability to stay focused. If driveless cars are developed, people will have less of a reason to pay attention to the road. Once the car actually needs human help, the driver will be too invested in their phones that they won't respond, possibly leaving themselves or others brutally maimed or killed. My opponents say that the flashing lights that will be installed in these vehicles will be enough to keep drivers monitoring the road. However, I feel that this attempt of a precautionary measures will not be enough. With the drivers eyes fixated on the fluorescent screen and their bodies immobilized as they are fully immeresed into their phones, they will be blind to the flashing lights. Due to our cellular distractions, we will be unable to put our full attention into watching the road, and proving driveless cars should not be invented.
Everyday you hear about a car accident. Someone was looking at their phone, they ran a stoplight, or whatever the case may be. Now imagine driveless cars. the rate of car accidents will not be reduced but will actually increase because of these new vehicles. The driver may not pay attention, and when the car needs the human to take control, they won't react in time and will collide with another vehcile. There could also be technical difficulties with the car where it doesn't alert the driver when it needs to causing another incident of vehicular chaos. The article even states that they are laws banning the mere testing of computer-driven cars. There are endless possibilites as to what could happen, but this is enough to show that driveless cars will only threaten the lives of pedestrians even more than current cars.
The main interest in driveless cars is that they are supposed to be driveless. However this is false. The car still needs a human to pay attention to the road when the car needs assistance. The name is a fallacy and the current details about it prove it is useless. Why replace our current cars that work just fine with computerized cars that could have all kinds of issues. They are just a dangerous and expensive waste.
Driveless cars are a very interesting topic. However the shouldn't be made because humans will be too distracted to handle them, the health and safety of pedestrians would be threatened, and the cars are not completely driveless. Eventually they could be made when people are more responsible, and the technology is more reliable and safe, but as of now they should stay off the roads and in our imaginations. | 45
|
323c0b8 | New technology is always created, and it only gets better and better every time. Technology is very important in schools because most kids are accustomed to interacting with technology on a daily basis. This makes school a little more fun for students who do not enjoy school as much as others. But did you ever think technology could be used for emotional purposes at school besides making it a little more interesting? There is a new invention called Facial Action Coding System that could help teachers and students have a better learning environment. Using new technology like Facial Action Coding System could be used in the classroom to help quiet students understand a subject and give teachers results of how the student feels.
In a classroom there is always some students that need help but do not want to ask for it. That means that their grades will most likely go down, and it will not be the teachers fault. Students feel ashamed to ask for help when they don't understand something because they don't want to look dumb in front of their friends or teachers. This problem has been going on for a long time, but new technology like the Facial Action Coding System might just be the solution. This new technology can read the students facial expressions when they are confused. "'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'" (D'Alto 6). With this new system students who don't like to speak up about their lack of understanding can get help without telling their teacher. This will prevent their grades from going down and improve their understanding. Therefore, the Facial Action Coding system would benefit the students who find it difficult to communicate their needs to their teachers.
In addition, instructors can learn the students' ways of learning and how they feel when they get the results from the Facial Action Coding System. It can be a challenge for teachers to understand their students because most students don't open up to their teachers. "For instance, you can probably tell how a friend is feeling simply by looking on her face. Of course, most of us would have trouble actually describing each facial trait that conveys happy, worried, etc" (D'Alto 5). Like with friends, teachers might notice their students might be feeling down, but they don't want to ask because they don't want to make them feel weird or the student might deny that they are not feeling well. It is impossible to know exactly how a person is feeling, and without knowing that we can't offer help. If the Facial Action Coding System was in the classroom students and teachers could have a better teacher to student relationship without too much awkaward communication.
All in all, technology is being created to make our lives a little easier, and a classroom can be difficult to run without communication. The Facial Action Coding System can help students and teachers understand each other to be succesful. For example, if a student needs help but doesn't want to ask for help the system will recognize confusion and change the lesson so the student can have a better understanding. Afterwards, the teacher will get the results and approach the student to give him or her the help they need personally and in private. If new inovations are being created we should use them to help us understand one another. | 34
|
8db1244 | Venus is dangerous and scientist cant get close enough to study it . Scientist are to just study Venus but cause of its crushing atmosphere and hot temperatures and wether. Scientist cant get close enough to the planet to study it so they are trying to create a solution on how to. The scientist already know if they get to close to the planet the planet will crush them and if it is possible to land it is way to hot. So scientist have came up with a solution thinking if they can hover over the planet will they be able to study it.
Scientist believe that Venus once use to thrive with life. Scientist believe that Venus many years ago Venus had oceans with life like earth. And also that Venus is close to the same size as Earth along with Mars. And thats why they may believe it had some life on the planet. They have made some electronics to go along with Venus harsh conditions but it is said that it only lasted 3 weeks. So they are trying something old called mechanical computers.
These mechanical computers and stand harsh conditions such as pressure,heat, and other forces. The mechanical computers are more powerful flexible and quick they played a important role in 1940s of world war 2. Since electronics cannot stand harsh conditions of Venus they are using something that does not require it. The mechanical computer only uses gears and levers which makes it good for the job. As the scientist work on it they are taking it on as a challenge to see the surface of Venus . | 12
|
7060c69 | Are Diverless Really Diverless?
Did you ever have a machine ruin your food before? Has a meachine ever giving you the wrong amount of change back at the grocery store? Well, that is what it would be like to have driverless cars. Cars driving themselfs sounds really effecient, but is it really? I don't think that the driverless cars would be very safe. The car still needs assistance, the car can't have good judgement, and it is limited on things it can handle.
This machine is limited on what it can do by itself. It will only be able to handle driving functions at speeds up to 25 mph. It can only steer, accelerate, and brake themselves. If anything else goes wrong the machine will notify the human. The driver will have to remain alert, like they are actually driving, and wait for the "driverless" car to notify them.
Can we even call it a driverless car, if it is constantly notifying us, "to take the wheel"
so to speak.
The car can't have good judgement, simply because it is a machine. Sadly, that is what driving is, making good choices off of your judgement. That is why the car needs to notify you for your help to guide the machine. The driver has to make the choices, and navigate through tricky obstacles. These cars won't be able to navigate through tricky obstacles. It can not make life or death decisions, even with the abundant amount of sensors and cameras it has incorperated in it.
Since the car still needs a diver in it, it has notifiers to get the attention of the driver. If the driver isn't alert, and the notifiers don't work, that person might die. So, even if we make laws for these cars the death rate will go up. People will die because this car isn't actually "driverless." This is why there is a minority of states that will allow diverless cars.
Tipically, diverless cars sound effecient, but it will do more bad than good. It isn't necessary. It's a luxury. The machine is limited to what it can do by itself. The car can't make good life or death decisions for you. It will be that machine that ruins your food, or the machine that gives you the wrong amount of change back and it could cost you your life. | 34
|
ffb4baa | It is a dangers job but so me of them know how to work with it and work their way around it so they don't get hurt at all , and in the text it says that " Modern computer are enormously powerful,and quick, but tend to be more delicate when it comes to extreme physical conditions " , that was found in paragarh 7.
The venus has the hottest surface temperature more then other planet in the solar
it says in the text that " Venus
has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system, even though mercury is closer to our sun".
Beside all them things the waether
is bad because they have big and powerful earthquakes and scary lightning , and it says that in the text " Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, amd frequent lightning stikes to probes to land onits surface", | 01
|
375c3d7 | The Presidental Elections .
The elections are a brutal time canididates compete for the favor of the citizens they campain, give great speaches about why they would be best for the position of leading the nation, often state why their adversary would be the worst person for the job. This causes oposition in the nation tearing it apart, however now not only are the people emotional about the election but also about the process, their are aguments about whether or not that the orginal process sould remain. The system that the elections have been held sence the Constitution has been written was that each citizen in a state would vote for one canadidate or the other by voting for the electors of that specific person then the electors in turn would vote for the cannidate and their votes would decide the presidency as stated in paragraph six and seven of the first source"
What Is the Electoral College?" by the Office of the Federal Register . This system althoug it has worked so far it is not the best way of conducting the elections in this time and age citizens should modify and conform the process to fit the need we have now.
The problems claimed by the ones opoised to the electoral college, as told in the second source " The Idefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong" by Bradford Plumer, are that the process cause individuals to have little to no say in the person that will be their leader for years, they do not have control over who their canadidates elect and must simply hope that they do indead vote for who they promised to, also the election is decieded by the few states that do not have a predetermined majority of voters in each state leaving the rest of the country feeling left out of the feasco of the election and as if their perfered canidate dose not care of them or their support and opinions. This persents the system to be truly flawed in the way that it is curantly operateing.
Individuals,as source three "In Defense of the Electorial College: Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President" by Richard A. Posner, wish to claim that the system is not flawed in great lenghts because it has worked for such a time that it is seen by them sufficant in its orcastration. It is said that the electors often do vote for who they pleaged they would and that decite is uncomon: however why should America risk the posibility of decite it has happened befor and if not prevented it will happen again. Do we not owe it to ourselves, posterity, and country to fix all potental harms to our nation the presidency should not be taken lightly it is a grand position that gives power and fame to all who hold those who have it could maintain the country, grace the nation with new prosperity, or condem Americans to years of suffering, toil, and misery. As citizens we should not alow anyone but the most valid character obtain this place. Mistakes are not alowed! we should take it upon ourselves now to modify this method be for it is to late and avertid.
There is no mitake America must act fast and modify this method for the nation, for their children, and for themselves. | 34
|
2c9eca0 | Venus reffered to as Earths "twin" is very much so persuitable dispite the dangers because Venus could possibly become a planet that people could live on, and much worth studying and further life.
In paragraph four it says that "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most earth like planet in our solar system." In parapragh four it also says venus was probabaly covered with large oceans and could have supported forms of life just like earth. Today the planet still has features that are similar to earth like rocky sediments, valleys, mountains, and craters. Seeing as how the astronomers have thought of there being life various forms of life on that planet, why not have reason to think people could make a way on venus as well and explore Venus?
In paragraph five they state ways to explore Venus without reaching the surface just yet. A blimp like vehicle hovering over 30 miles above Venuses surface. The vehicle hovering would avoid the not so kindly conditions of Venus. The temperature would be 170 degrees farhenhit, the pressure of air would e close to sea level of Earth. Solar power would be pleniful and radiation shouldn't exceed Earth's levels, so much worthy of studying the planet Venus and looking into further life on the planet. The conditions wouldn't be easy but it could be survivable. | 23
|
65e7345 | The Face on Mars
Have you ever thought of being a scientist at NASA or have you ever seen the Face on Mars? Well I am a scientist and I have been very lucky to go to space and see the Face in person. It was one of the best experiences that has ever happened to me in life! Some people think that the Face was created by aliens even though there has been many tests and agreements that it is just a natural landform. I belive that it is a natural landform beacuse there is proof that scientists have figured it was just another Martian mesa, there are pictures that proves it could just be formed like that because it is common around Cydonia, and there has not yet been any proof to encourage it was created by aliens.
The scientists and I have done several researches ever since we first saw the Face. Everything has yet led to prooving it is just another Martian mesa. Looking through all the pictures, everything stated that it is just a huge rock formation. The rock resembles a human head with eyes, a mouth, and a nose. I believe that after all the temperatures such as the heat and coldness, it could have caused it to be shaped like that. There has probably even been spaceships that has landed in Mars in search of investigation. The spaceships could have formed these shapes when landing there.
As you probably know, it is very common around Cydonia to have these kind of natural landfoms. Yes, it is common to have shapes and forms that are unusual such as the Face. The only difference in this one was that it had unusual shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharaoh. Theres not really much of a difference if you think about it. It is unbelievable that it's the first time poeple think of an alien doing this art work when they have never thought of this idea when we have found other evidence of natural lanforms like the Face.
There has been plenty of evidence to proove that the Face is just a natural landform, but there is no proove of it to be created by aliens. Looking at the pictures closely, there are no footprints, fingerprints, or marks to show any living life in Mars. If theres no living life in Mars, then how could there be aliens? I want you to think about that. There has not been any kind of creatures found in Mars which is shocking.
Now that I have explained myself of why I believe that the Face is just a natural landform, what do you think? Do you still believe aliens created it? If you do, I encourage you to do some research and tell me the reasons of why you think that the Face was created by aliens. After all the research I've done, all my conclusions sum up to the same knowledge through the evidence prooven. | 34
|
f4c6509 | Using a motor vehicle as a source of transportation is part of everyday life and is not rare to the stereotypical American. But cities such as Paris, Bogota, and Vauban are all striving towards reducing the rate of motor vehicle usage in their areas. Advantages of limiting car usage are lower greenhouse gas rates, suburbs can become more compact and more accesible to public transportation, and people are able to live less stressful lives.
Transportation is the second largest source of America's emmisions and is responsible for fifty percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States but is slowly making a change towards helping the enviornment and being beneficial towards carbon emissions. In 2005, the number of miles driven in the United States was at it's highest rate. As time went by, the numbers started dropping and getting lower. Many sociologits believe that if the numbers get even lower and stay at that rate, the benefits will come for the enviornment but unfortunetly not for car companys. Paris typically has more smog than any other European capital and is working towards a way to fix that. Paris banned driving due to the intensity and abundance of the smog in their city and had people use public transportation free of charge for about a week. Not using motor vehicles for those days really did help the situation of Paris and gave people an insight as to how life would be without cars.
Vauban, an upscale community in Germany, is home to suburban pioneers who have given up their cars. Seventy percent of Vauban's family do not own cars and fifty-seven percent sold a car to move there. "Smart planning" is a component of the movement to seperate suburban life from auto use to create a denser and more compact enviornment and let people be more accesssible to public transportation. This means less space for parking, and more stores compactly placed and at short distances. In Bogota, "Car-free day" is part of an improvement campaign which helps residents of the city to see how life is life without the use of cars for a day. People use public transportation and walk to their destinations with no problem. More parks and sport centers have also been added to the area as a result of less car usage, so more space for other important things.
Dropping off your kid at daycare, then driving to work, then having to drive your child to soccer practice can be a constant and stressful cycle for most parents. Residents of suburbs that have low car usage rates claim that they are less stressful. In a suburban community with little to no motor vehicle usage, the suburb will be more compact, having more stores and buildings closer to eachother at very short distances. This makes it easier for residents to get from point A to point B quicker and more efficiently. This also allows for more walking areas with less traffic and dangerous cars to worry about.
Cars can be useful in many ways but for the better of the enviorment, peoples cities, and sanity, little to no car use is the way to go. | 45
|
4a2249a | Although the school system has advanced quite far in recent history, there are still plenty of clear problems with the way children receive their education. Many students are constantly stressed out and are not truly learning the material because of it. Additionally, each student may have a different learning style, so it is not helpful to teach them in large groups with the same methods. The recent innovation of FACS (Facial Action Coding System) can be utilized by schools to vastly improve the way children are educated.
Many issues with the education system could be improved upon, if not completely eradicated, with the use of facial recognition technology within classrooms. As mentioned in paragraph 6 in the article, FACS can be used to recognize when a student is confused. Schools could take advantage of this technology to notify teachers when a student is struggling with material, and help them get back on track. This would allow teachers to adapt their teaching style to best suit each student. Furthermore, all different ages of students today are constantly stressed out with the massive workload that is forced upon them each day. One of the many consequences of this is that the students may not actually be learning the material beceause of how focused they are on the responsibilities they have for other classes. A facial recognition system such as FACS could be programmed to detect when a student's facial expression demonstrates stress, and notify the school so they can proactively help the student cope with this stress before the situation worsens. This will help the student relax and focus better.
The potential of this technology is huge, as it could be used to improve every student's life, both inside and outside of school. If schools were to have the ability to help students with any material they don't understand the first time and asist them in coping with or eliminating stress, it would make the experience of going to school much more enjoyable. This would motivate students to do their best to be successful in school, which would drastically improve their life, as well as society in general. If all schools manage to overcome the technical and monetary difficulties of implementing FACS in teaching, it would benefit everybody in many ways. | 34
|
82e0c2c | In Vauban Germany, the people in the suburbs have stopped driving. Parking or housing a car predominately prohibited and the only vehicle you'd see is the tram that take citizens from the edge of the community or to downtown Freiburg. You can own a car, but the parking space is incredibly limited, sometimes even expensive.
The residents aren't complaining. 57% of the population even had sold their car to live in Vauban, one woman even stating she felt less tense without a vehicle.
The growing trend of reducing automotive use in suburban lifestyles is a role in a movement known as "smart planning." Cars are often heavily populated in the suburbs, which hinders the efforts to reduce greenhouse gas tailpipe emissions, as up to 50% of greenhouse gas emissions in the US come from cars.
Many of the world is now slowly following Vauban's steps with actions like reducing the size of suburbs and and giving its residents more access to public transportation. Rather than creating distant malls along highways, stores are being placed on a main street that's a walk away.
In Paris, after dealing with a nearly record-high amount of smog, a driving ban was enforced to reduce and/or clear out the pollution. Public transit was free and the smog managed to clear enough that cars with odd-numbered plates were allowed to be put in use again.
Bogota, California also took part in a day without passenger vehicles, with only buses and taxis in commision. On Day Without Cars, 7 million people rode bikes, skated, hiked, or took a bus to their job. It's believed to help reduce pollution and reduce stress. Thanks to the day, parks and sport centers have appeared, sidewalks made smoother and broadened, rush-hour rules designed to cute traffic, and plenty of new shops and dining places within short distance.
Recents studies also appear reveal a decrease in car purchases as time passes, raising the question of America's interest in automotives and driving. As of 2013, an average person drove 9% below the peak, identical to where is was in 1995. While the price of cars is a factor taken into consideration, the decrease hopefully hints to a more permanent drop in car use.
With this comes a benificial lessen of carbon emmissions, conserve resources and improve safety. Only time will tell where it will go from here. | 12
|
a39e44d | Do you think that the face was created by aliens or is it just a landform? I belive that it was just a natral landform and its just one of them illusions that looks like something but its not. In the passage it said that NASA had unvield the image for everyone to see with the caption "huge rock formation... which resembles a human head...formed by shadows giving the ilusion of eyes ,nose,and mouth
NASA believed that people would pay more atention to mars acording to the article " The authers reasoned it whould be a good way to engage the public and attract atention to mars." "it certanily did" the faceof mars has become a pop icon it was in hollywood films ,books,magazines,raido talk shows even in haunted grocery store checkout lines for 25
In conclusion peope today still believe that it was created by aliens but I still believe that its just a landmark on a diffrent planet. What do you belive? Was it aliens or is it a landmark? | 12
|
1c56823 | In this passage it introduces this mission on traveling to Venus, a planet in our solar system. In the beginning of this passage we are pointed towards the dangers to this mission, but also devices that can encourage astronauts and humans to accomplish this challenging mission.
Venus has often been referred to as Earth's "twin." With scientists attempting to study venus has been a challenge due to the risk of getting there. According to the author, "no spacecraft has lasted more than a few hours." Venus has toxic substances that clouds the atmosphere. According to the passage, "due to the extreme weather nothing will be able to last."
NASA has thought of constructing a vehicle that can hover over the planet and take photographs and videos to study the differences and similarities between earth. This vehicle will be 30 miles or more above Venus and the astronauts will send in information. More importantly, researchers cannot have samples of the life on this planet , which would be more effecient than the pictures. Another project could be the computer from the 1800s despite the technology back then it would be reliable ,because the power and it does not require electronics at all.
The worthy pursuit of this dangers have to be really thought out before traveling to this risky planet. It's effectiveness due to the ways to study it is low but can be very relieving to reach. | 12
|
4530e97 | While one may think a driverless car is ideal for everyday transportation. Many others may think its not a nessicary improvment at all. Focusing on the disadvantages of this "driverless car" leaves one to look further into detail on the new developments and ask themselves how useful could this possibly be to me and my everyday routune.Doing so allows one to think logically on why it might not be the best idea.
Throught the passage the author gives several examples on how benificial this car could be to mankind. Saying that, it also gives a smorgashboard of nonbenificial and somewhat hastling examples. In paragraph 2 in states that " television and movies have long been fascinated with cars that could drive themselves...." implying that our society is intreuiged by the idea of a driverless car, but that response is immediatley followed up with " ....in reality, google has had cars that could drive independently under certain conditions since 2009." . I'd like to point out the fact that we've had driverless cars for 7 years now,
and although
car companies are making more improvments to the cars we use today, we are still left with accomindations under specific conditions we have to inforce in order to safley drive.
Paragraph 3 refrences General motors car company, and engineers at Berkeley trying to improve this idea of a driverless car. They've gone a step further and created a concept car that could run on a special test track embedded with an electrical cable, corresponding with the concept car. Shorty in the same paragraph it explains" ...These smart cars worked surprisingly well, but they requuiered massive upgrades to exsisting roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical.". By saying that it allows us readers to understand how much thought is being but into this
project, and even though it was a great idea sometimes you have to think logically.
In paragraphs 6-7 it argues the advantage of roadside assisting. This paragraph explains very specific details of what the "driverless car" can do for you, such as: " speacial touch sensors, self stirring, accelerate, and brakes." These addded details could be helpful in certain situations such as traffic, construction sites, ect. But is stated shortly after that under these specfic condtions tour "driverless car" can be of no assistance. At this point we'd then have to take conrol of the car and deal with all theses agonizing, everday problems.
so in conclusion a "driverless car" is meant to be benificial, but what is it actually helping you with? | 23
|
192dd1b | Sometimes having to be a scientist is not the best idea. Scientist discover different things at different paces,such as the ones that these scientists discovered on Mars. This face that the scientists discovered have evidence that it is just a natural landform. It could also be proven that the face that was found on Mars was not created by aliens. This face was is the face of an alien,and it is going to be proven in this argumentative essay.
First off,the face that was found has no signs of being an alien because any planet has those wierd funky looking holes right? It could have been that with the temperature and time those holes could have appeared making it look like a human face. It could of just simply have been a coincidence that it happened like that. Either way we could say that maybe it was an alien or just a natural landform,nobody has been able to personally prove it because there has not been one astronaut that has went up to Mars and looked at it with its own eyes. The human being has made assumptions about a lot of different things and the majority of the time the human being is incorrect because they do not have evidence to prove that what they said was correct.
Next,lets say that maybe the human being is correct,how could scientists prove that it is what the human being suspects?
In the article in paragraph 2 it reads,"Scientists figured it was just another Martian mesa,common enough around Cydonia,only this one had usually shadows that made it look like an Egyptian Pharoh." In this part of the reading the author of this article are saying that it could have just been another Martian mesa,but that this one had the unusual shadows that make it look like an Egyptian Pharoh. Like it says in the text it could have just been the shadows something that make it look like an ancient Egyptian Pharoh. It could have maybe been that Martian that the scientists have said it is.
Finally,in this situation scientists might be correct again. It could only be a natural landform that formed with the weather or something different that helps little things like these form up. There are no certain clues or evidence that this "face" could be a human or an ancient Egyptian Pharoh. Sometimes the human being wants to suspect things that are not close or correct to what a specialized scientist can do. Sometimes it is just probably that the human brain gets carried away by what it looks at. Sometimes it helps to pay close attention to what we are doing or looking at, for the hiumans good. | 23
|
39b6d1e | Scientists found "The Face" when the NASA's spacecraft Viking 1 was taking pictures to find a landing spot for Viking 2. When the picture was first taken it resembled a human face. Scientists belived it was just another martian mesa because they were commin in the region of Mars called Cydonia. Scientist realsed the picture to the public trying to bring attetion to Mars. They didnt realize how much attention it was going to bring. I'm going to prove it is a natrual landfrom.
The cameras scientists used when the first image of the mesa was taken wasn't the best. In 1998 when NASA's Mars Global Surveyor took picutres of the face you can clearly see that it is a landform. The picture was ten times sharper than the one taken by Viking1. People were still skeptic because there were clouds the camera had to shoot through. They said the alien marking were his by the clouds.
On April 9. 2001 MGS got close enough to take more pictures. They took the pictures and used the absolute resolution to see any "alien markings" the picture shows a mesa.
A mesa is like a butte that are common in West America. There are landforms on earth just like the "alien face" that some people thought proved there was life on Mars. If there was life on Mars I belive NASA would know about it first. The face got a lot of media attention but in the end it is just another mar discovery in the line of many. | 23
|
060d2bb | Everyone think's that it is a face that was created by aliens but its not. The thing that appears to be a face is not a face it is simply a natural landform. It is a natural landform because on April 5, 1998, global surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time and snapped a photo of the so called alien artifact. Their photo was ten times better than the original Viking photo so that meant they could get a better view out of it. After looking over the photo they found out that is was no alien arttifact.
But people were not satisfied. So on april 8, 2001 a summer day in Cydonia the global surveyor drew closer for a second look. As they rolled the spacecraft 25 degress to the center of the
face they took an extrordinary photo. Using the cameras absolute maximum resolution for the photo. That means for each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo.
You can discern things in a digital photo 3 times bigger than the pixel size. So that means if the human lookin landform was an alien artifact u would be able to see airplans on the ground. Egyption-stye pyramids, and even small shacks. But what the phoyo acually shows is the Martian equivalent to a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West. | 23
|
2548fcc | In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming." it talks about how its expected to have cars that drive theirselves very soon. Humanity has always dreamed of seeing self driven cars or flying cars. It has been portrayed in movies and television shows, but is it really a safe thing for humans? In the artice the author presents both positive and negative aspects of driverless cars. Driverless cars should not be developed because, they do not really drive on their own, people would get bored of these driverless cars, and new laws would have to be developed.
There really is no such thing as a "Driverless Car". In the article it states that in 2013 BMW announced that they developed something called "Traffic Jam Assistant", which means that the car can manage driving itself to speeds up to 25 mph. Except they can't really continue driving theirselves all the time. The author states that "They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills, such as navigating through work zones and around accidents." If the car is still notifiying the driver to take charge at times then the care isn't really a driverless car. The author also says "This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires. This necessitates the car being ready to quickly get the drivers attention". A driverless car should not have to get the drivers attention if it is suppose to drive by itself, the driver should be able to remain safe and calm in a driverless car.
Another reason why driverless cars should not be developed is because people would get bored of not being able to drive their own car. Yes the driverless car would relieve a lot of the stress that you get knowing you have to drive but not driving at all seems boring. In the article it says "'The psychological aspects of automation are really a challenge,' admits Dr.Werner Huber, a BMW project manages driver. 'We have to interpret the driving in a new fun way.'" This shows that even the ones manufacturing the driverless cars beleive it would be boring for people to not drive all the time.
Next reason to why driverless cars are not good for being developed is because new laws would have to be developed. The development of new laws is not easy and according to laws now its only safe when an a actual person is driving the car. In the article it states that "traffic laws are written with the assumption that the only safe car has a human driver in control at all times. As a result, in most states it is illegal even to test computer driven cars." This shows that if driverless cars are developed then new laws would have to be developed and some laws would have to be changed too. It is possible that it could change safety laws aswell.
In conclusion driverless cars should not be developed because, they do not really drive on their own, people would get bored of these driverless cars, and new laws would have to be developed. Although it sounds like a fun thing the outcome of driverless cars is never known. These autonomous cars could change the world in a negative way. The old fashion driving we all know wouldn't be the same. | 34
|
35cb607 | The article I read was mainly talking about one of the planets near earth which is Venus and Mars but they were talking about the planet of Venus. Venus is a planet where humans could not live there because we could not support all the stuff they have there. In the article it talks about all the danger it has to that planet and why it really bad to live there and how we couldn't support the conditions. The author uses entertain to show us suspense about the planet Venus. The author uses suspense to show us how dangerous Venus is and how we could not live there.
The author uses suspense to show us about how there is a place called Venus which has really bad conditions to the point that you can easily die. In the article it shows how the author describe us the tearms in the planet Venus. "Since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe this issue explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus's in more than three decades. Numerous factors contribute to Venus's reputation as a challenging for humans to study, despite its proximity to us" The author uses suspense to show us how dangerous it is to even touch Venus. It also shows us that not even a spacecraft could survive there less than some few hours.
The author also use suspense to entertain us about the planet of Venus and to show us how of bad conditions they have in the planet of Venus. In the text it shows how the author showed us about how bad it is and what are the terms in the the planet of Venus. "A thick atomosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planets's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atomospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." The authour uses suspense to show how the planet of Venus is really had bad terms to live there and how you would die easliy. It also shows that Earth compare to Venus shows how we couldn't support the conditions.
The author uses suspense on both paragraph to show that the planet Venus is really bad condition to live and how not even one spacecraft could land there without surviving. It also shows how the terms in Venus is and how powerful it is compare to Earth percent on carbon dioxide, degrees and atmospheric pressure. This relates to real world stuff by scientists trying to see if they could land there safely without any harm but as you see on the paragraphs it's not possible because you can easliy die because of the terms there. The article shows how the author uses suspense on the article and shows the terms of conditions on planet of Venus. | 23
|
24e64ad | First of all, good morning/afternoon/night, hope you're having a good day.
So, the author gives many details to prove that visiting Venus is worth the dangers and who knows what else can be there, explaining that this planet could be our safest/secure option to explore, since has many characteristics from the Earth, like he says, mountains, valleys, and craters, and also that Venus was more likely to be the planet where there was life just like in the Earth actually, and that's exactly why so many scientists and astronomers are fascinated by our sister planet, even if it is almost or basically inhospitable.
He honestly has a point, if Venus has all of those good things, then why not can we do an effort and visit it?
Technology has advanced a LOT, and we have people intelligent enough, so it is possible to visit Venus, and when that happens, we could examinate and analyze this planet, so we can find a way to make it a future home for us, since the Earth is actually in a really bad state, thanks to us, humans that don't notice how bad this situation is.
The author even includes the NASA, thing that with other important things that he says (like information about what NASA is doing, and other important data about what can we do) means that he's very serious about this, so, here, he makes a really clear and explained claim, where he provides specific details and information that we definitely need to considerate, in conclusion. | 23
|
b218e90 | The Electoral College is a process made by the founding fathers for the election of presidents by the Congress's vote. The Electoral College is a process, but it is an unfair process. Americans are supposed to vote for who they desire to be president, not a group of electors in Congress. There is no possible way for Americans to choose their president if at the end of it all, a group of electors make the final choice. According to the Office of the Federal Register, Americans choose the state electors when voting for President because when voting for president, Americans are actually voting for the candidate's electors. It makes no sense then to vote for a president, let's just make it to where we vote for electors because we obviously aren't voting for who we want as president.
The main purpose of voting is to help the candidate American voters want as president to win the election. If popular vote was the way to determine who would be elected as President, everybody would be happy. There are times in an election when everybody is sure that the candidate they voted for is going to win. Americans watch as they see the votes go up by popular vote, but then later, the candidate they thought would win has lost because of the Electoral College. If popular vote was the way Presidents were elected, everything would be made easier without controversy. However, since the Electoral College does play a big role in the election of presidents, popular vote is never going to be a working system. Americans just need to figure out that their vote is never going to really count, but the Electoral College's vote surely will.
In an article by Bradford Plumer, the fact that over sixty percent of voters would prefer a direct election than how we vote now is stated. The Electoral College System is based on Americans voting for the electors that are the candidate's party. When Americans go to vote, they vote for electors who support the President and then the electors choose the president. When Americans go to vote, the banners should just say Vote For Electors. When Americans vote, it is made to seem as they are voting directly for the President they want to be elected. Instead, Americans are actually voting for electors. Multiple times you'll hear the saying, "Every vote counts." but really, every vote does not count. No matter how many times Americans vote for their President, the Electoral College has the final say no matter what American's votes are.
The major problem that worries many, is the problem of a tie in the electoral vote. During an election when a tie occurs, the state delegations vote for who will be president. According to the article The Indefensible Electoral College by Bradford Plumer, each state is able to cast one vote and the one single state representative makes the decision for the state. If the point of an election is for the people to vote and choose, there shouldn't even be a option for the one representative to choose. All the votes that were just cast by Americans all go down the drain now. In the case of a tie, all the power and weight goes to the one state representative to choose who becomes the president. The represtative does not care about what the people want, that representative will choose what they want to do with this election. According to Bradford Plummer, during the 2000 campaign, Rhode Island, South Carolina and fifteen other states did not even get to view media markets or campaigns and did not even get to see the candidates. Those states howeve still voted, not knowing anything about these candidates because overall the Electoral College makes the last call.
The Electoral College is an unfair process that also plays a big role in elections. No matter how Americans vote, the Electoral College is going to be the people who elect the president. Americans vote for who they want as their president but the Electoral College simply makes that decision for you. Americans shouldn't even vote, the Electoral College can make that decision. Many people in America simply want the popular vote than to have the process of Electoral College in place. We should all take a vote to abolish the Electoral College. But wait, the Electoral College might say no since they always make the overall decision. | 45
|
f3ada95 | Why explore Venus? Is it not dangerous, and scary, and hot? What could it possibly have that Earth has not already given us? Well, Venus is much more like Earth than most people like to think. And personally, between you and I, I think they are scared of the opportunity to leave their comfortable homes and Cheetos. Venus could be crucial for Earth, and we are about to find out why.
Here is a hypothetical scenario. Tomorrow, we find out it is too late to stop global warming, and we have twenty years to evacuate the planet, or we die with it. Scientists everywhere panic! 'Oh no! We don't have anywhere to go!' Then, NASA steps in, like a really protective dad, 'fear not, children. We can be safe on Venus.' Everyone responds happily, until they process the situation. 'Wait, did you say Venus?! We would never last in such a desolate, violent place!' Well, you're wrong buddy. And science can vouch for me. Venus isn't so different from Earth. At least, it didn't used to be. Scientists who have made successful missions to Venus with droids have found traces of oceans, valleys, mountains, you name it! There have been many, many signs on Venus of Earth-like conditions! The article states that Astronomers have reason to believe Venus was actually more Earth-like than Mars! It amazes and confuses them! On top of Venus being just like us, it would be easily acessible. After all, it is just a few light years away.
Venus, while very desolate, and violent, has also shown signs of possibly being able to support life as we know it. Scientists would like to keep their manned missions above the violent weather conditions, making it easy for them to study the surface of the small planet. The traces of water and weather left behind provide a sense of comfort for humans, knowing that if Venus was a last resort, they would be safe and secure.
Now, in order for Venus to truly be acessable, in those hypothetical twenty years, we would have to make major technological advances. We would need transportation, protection, shelter, amongst many other things. However, Venus does provide some of the things we need, or keeps us safe from what we should avoid. Venus provides a close position to the sun, which, while still very hot, leaves plenty of wiggle room for solar energy, utilized by us! Not only would that power us, but it would also keep us from ruining another planet! The air pressure in the atmosphere is similar to that of sea level on Earth, which would be ideal for the young, and the old. Additionally, Venus provides protection from harmful radiation, much like Earth! What's not to love about avoiding radiation?
Venus is a strong, beautiful, powerful and incredible planet. It can protect us, serve us, and make us feelm safe. While there are some disadvantages, I'd argue that there are more advantages. Who wouldn't? Humans act on their curiosity, with no regard for danger or doubts. In this growing age of technology, how could we? I'd keep an open mind on space exploration. After all, we might be just lightyears from our new home. | 34
|
519100a | Imagaine you're looking at the sky and you see a star thats is brighter than most. Then you might be seeing the planet Venus which is one of the brightest points in the sky which is where it gets it's nickname "Evening Star." The author from the text talks about this and more.To support his claims he used percentage/dergees, future plans, real situations, and real events.
In paragraghs 3 and 5 it shows him using percentages and dergrees to support some of his claim. The text states, "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. One the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric presure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." The text also states, "at thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 dergees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on earth." With this text evidence it shows how he is using his evidence to show how much Venus is different from the earth and why their is no life on the planet.
The author talk about how venus and Mars are our planet neighbor and how we have tried to land on Venus but to no sucess. The Author states, "humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world. Each previous mission was unmanned, and for goos reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours." The author also states, "Venus was the hottest surface tempature of any planet in out solar system, even though Mercury is closer to our sun." This shows that the author is providing real evidence to prove his study could be dangerous cause of how the past turned out, but it's worth looking into in the future.
With what has failed in the past we can learn from that and move on stronger with a better chance of suceeding. The passage says, "NASA is working on other approches to study Venus. NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Also says, "Our tevels 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 evidence given it does show we could grow from the past and do better in the future with each new attempt.
In conclusion with all these details given to us by the author. He has supported himself with the evidence and some ideas given in the passage. He has proven himself in the text with facts and past events. The auther did support his claims like using percentages/dergees, real events, real situations, and future plans. | 34
|
b574b32 | For some people having a car is a neccesity, but for others it can just be stressful. I believe it is much safer with out cars. There would be less accidents ,
less pollution and it would save people a lot of money .
In Paris they had to enforce a partial driving ban to clear the smog. If there were drivers out on the road they got fined. This didnt stop everyone, there was counts of 4,000 people being fined for driving. Just five days after the partial ban congestion went down 60 percent.
Just Imagine if five days of no driving caused congestion to go down 60 percent, how much would it go down if cars were eleminated all together.
There are some disadvantages to not having a car. Such as not being able to get where you need to go on time, biking or walking far places, getting sweaty before work or school ect.
Driving can also be very stressful, for example when businessman Carlos said "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution,". This statement suggest that it is stressful to drive a car.
In conclusion, I would definitally want to have a car so i could get where i needed to go on time. I would also like to reserve the car only if i really needed to use it. | 12
|
73d2bf3 | My position on driverless cars are that they would be very efficent but would also have negative outcomes as everything does. I would be for driverless cars because i think that the pros of the driverless cars would outshine the cons of it. When it comes to technology there are always going to be negative and positive outcomes to things its just about how much more positive than negative it is.
As stated in the artical it would be very useful to prevent accidents and help drivers that arent in full control of there vehicle yet to learn how to better drive on the road. The rear veiw cameras that have been made to help cars notice when they are abou to hit something is a good start to helping people that might not pay as much attention as others but it can also be negative in other ways. The traffic jam assist could be useful as well as it helps people that are stuck in traffic maybe in busy cities or on a road where an accident has occured
To conclude i think that it would be a good idea and i fully support the driverless cars while also being aware of the downsides to them and trying to work around them. It all comes down to the laws and how the government can make our streets safer for our generation now and future generations. | 12
|
5e50b4e | Cars have been a part of our culture and society for a very long time now, but this might need to change as limiting the useage of care would lead to substancle benifets to our society. these benifets are a lowared carbon footprint, not having to spend as much on upkeep and lowared public transportation costs, and more closely knit communites with healtier people.
To begin, limiting car usage would greatly reduce our carbon footprint thus help the enviorment. This is because emissions from cars produce around 12 precent of the greenhouse gasses in Europe and could be up to 50 percent in certain car-intensive areas in the United Sates. If we where to cut down on driving there would be a significant reduction in the pollution in the enviorment. Paris is already enacting laws around this where only people with odd license plates where able to drive one day and even plate numbered cars the other. This has lead to less congested roads and lower amount of smog in the city.
Another draw to limiting car usage lies in lowered cost of public transportation and less money having to be spent on car upkeep and insurance. If people where to use more public transportaiton insted of personal cars people not have to worry about needing a car and insted keep the money that would normaly go to upkeep and insurance to use on other things. Furthermore if public transportation became more nessisary, then public transportaion will be cheaper such as in Paris where public transportaion became free for the week when they where testing the new law.
Lastly with a reduction in car usage there would be better suburban planning like in Vauban, Germany and people getting more exsersize. Over in Vauban driving cars is severly limited so locations like shopping centers are a walk away from houses and the city is more closly knit with more bike and pedestrian paths. With people walking more that would help with the growing obesity problem Amarica is currently facing and could lead people to live healtier lifestyles
In conclusion limiting car usage would be a very fruitful endevear because of the reduction of our carbon footprint, not having to pay car insurance and lowared cost of public tranportation, and more closly knit communities away from the roar of an engine the world would be much better off. | 34
|
4078d46 | I am a scientist member of NASA. I am here to tell you that the Face on the region called Cydonia was not made by aliens, and that it is just a natural landform. With new high-resolution images and 3Daltimetry from NASA's Mars global Survey spacecraft reveal the Face on Mars for what it really is: A mesa.
Because of NASA's budget we wish that there was an ancient civilization on Mars, but there is not. On April 5, 1998, when Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, Michael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. The photo revealed a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all. This so called Face on Mars is just a huge rock formation that resembles a human head formed by shadows giving the illusion of eyes,nose, and mouth.
On April 8, 2001-a cloudless summer day in Cydonia-Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look, and capture an extraordianary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution. Each pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters, compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo. As a rule of thumb, you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size. So, if there were objects in this picture like airplanes on the ground or Egyptian-style pyramids or even small shacks, you could see what they were. What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West.
The Face looks similar to the Middle Butte in the Snake River PLain of Idaho. A lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars. So as you can see, the Face on Mars is nothing more than a large rock formation, and is not a face at all. | 23
|
dc6dfac | Men are like ants. We are always in a rush and always desperate to arrive on time. The easiest way to arrive on time in any place, is by car. Cars, however, tend to do a lot more bad then they do good. Cars release large amounts of pollution and can raise smog and noise levels in areas where there is a lot of driving. Smog and pollution isn't very good for anybody, so some areas have taken preventative steps to keep Earth healthy and to keep people healthy as well. The shocking part is, the cars get cut out.
In some areas, like the experimental Vauban in Germany, cars are not allowed at all. No honking is heard when the sun rises, and streets are oddly empty. Shops are lined up withen walking distance, and few buses run to allow for people to travel a little bit quicker. In fact, 70% of Vauban's population do not own cars, and many sold their cars for a chance to live in Vauban. The streets are safer, and people seem to be a lot less tense about things, 'When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way,' said Heidrun, an occupant of Vauban. Vauban has proved that removing the car entirely can help to calm people, and even redesign the way cities and homes work; to provide safer, cleaner areas for man to live in.
Cars can need to be removed for more negative reason as well. Paris, France, had sever issues with the amount of smog in the city. Smog can be incredibly dangerous, making large chances of acid rain and possible issues with breathing. France has had one of the largest amounts of smog when compared to many other cities, usually only beat by Beijing, which in one of the most polluted areas. France knew, however, that the city could not possibly handle having every car taken away in a night, so they attempted to cut a half off for each day. For a week, fines were placed on cars with license plates that ended in either an even or odd number, the taxes applied more specifically to which license plates would be tagged, odd on one day, even the next. The large fines did not persuade everyone, however, and 4,000 driviers were still fined. The week of cutting down cars, however, proved to work very well and cut down on the amount of smog quickly and carefully so that everyone would have a safer and cleaner Paris.
In Bogota, Columbia, the removal of cars is celebrated as if it were a holiday. Each year on one day everyone will refrain from driving to skateboard, bike, walk, hike, or any number of modes of transportation; to prevent the usage of cars. The city does this not only as a fun way to promote an eco-friendly Bogota, but to cut down on it's own smog issues. Like any capital of any country, there's a lot of movement, and with movement comes cars, and with cars: smog. Their event has even inpired many other cities and countries to do the same thing, continuously aiding in the fight against global warning.
Even America, the gas-guzzling, NASCAR approving, road-rage warriors of the world, try to cut down on car usage. The issue has even reached the President. America has found that slowly but surely that men and women are slowly moving away from the car as a mode of transportation. Since 2005, car usage has dropped tremoendously in favour of public transportation like trams and buses. | 34
|
59244d5 | I believe that the election for our president of the United States should be chosen by popular vote and not by some random people we don't know. If I wanted to have someone to be in charge of what goes on where I live I would want to have a say on who should be in charge. I think that if a popular vote wasn't the determining factor in whom won the election; then that person didn't really win the election.
in the election of 2012 Barack Obama received 61.7 percent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 percent of the popular votes cast for him and Mitt Romney. the amount of electoral votes should not determine which of the nominees will win the election i should be whomever receives the majority of popular votes. in the election of 2000 Al Gore received more individual votes than George W. Bush nationwide, but Bush won the election, he received 271 electoral vote compared to Gore's 266 electoral votes.
There are many people who travel to vote for our president and it would not be fair to them if their votes didn't really matter because someone else made the final decision. If our president isn't chosen by the citizens of the united states then the person that was chosen by unfair terms and bias choices isn't really the president of the united states; but is truly the president of the men and/or women in the electoral college who chose he or she.
The president should be chosen fairly by a just and unbiased vote cast by the people of the united states. Only then is it truly fair and right to the citizens of the United States to call that man or woman our president! | 12
|
29fa226 | In the past I have had so much trouble while taking tests, they are either too hard and I don't understand what is going on or I just can't focus. That is a bad thing because that means if
I am doing bad other kids might be doing bad as well. In class computers should be able to use the Facial Action Coding System to alter things to our knowledge if we get confused on a problem, bored, or distracted.
One way computers can use the FAC System is recognizing when we get confused on a test question. When we get confused instead of asking for help from the teacher the computer can take us through steps to solve the problem and then gives us a new problem so we can do what we just reviewd ourselves. The text also gives us a similar way, in the text it says that the computer can tell when we get confused or bored and modify the test or lesson to make it easier.
Another way the FAC System could be useful is if we get bored during a test or lesson. If we get bored during a trest or lession that computer will recognise that and then taylor the losson so it can be less boring and more fun.
The last way that the FAC system can be useful in schools is if we get distracted. If we get distracted by something while taking a test or doing a lesson of some sort the computer could be able to recognise that and give us some sort of brain break to help give our minds a break to think before getting back into the lesson. This can be helpful in many ways because sometimes if you are distracted by sonmething you are not going to give other work your best effort.
In conclusion in class computers should be able to use the Facial Action Coding System to alter things to our knologer if we get confused on a problem, bored, or distracted | 23
|
822adb5 | Driverless cars on coming soon, and most people aren't worried or see the danger of any of this. To have many self driving cars on the street is dangerous and unless the cars have been tested and are fully operational with no common errors or bugs.
Before creating driverless cars, it is very important that they have been vigerously tested and confirmed to be safe. Regulations in most states state that it is illegal to test the computer-driven cars. Safty is a huge factor in deciding weather or not the driverless cars should be everywhere on the street, however they won't be "everywhere" for a while. The technology is well known to be expensive, but this can still be at a great risk.
Google's self driving cars are still in development, but recently in the last few months they've gotten into wrecks, and in one case, hit a man on camera, however he is fine now. A situation like that scared a lot of people and changed their mind on these cars. Whether or not the car was still in development doesn't matter, what matters is that these self-driven cars have the ability to do this damage. This isn't even my greatest fear about these cars yet.
Buying a self-driven car has what benifits? Bragging rights? It's a two-hundred thousand early adopter fee, because it's very enforced that you don't fall asleep even if your car is driving for you. The driver still needs to pay attention to the road because at a time that the car doesn't know what to do next, as it goes onto an unmapped road in it's data base, it will alert the driver to take over. In a similar case, the system fails, because computers fail everyday, the driver is not paying attention because his new car can drive by itself, then the system fails as the car is going sixty miles per hour on a road with many other cars. Accidnets can occur if the driver believes that their new car can do everything by itself.
My main issue with these cars is what if someone hacks your car? It sounds silly and far fetched at first, but it has already happened. Some kids in their parent's basement decided to hack a car, just to see if they could, and they sucsessfully did. There was a bug in the software of a particular, non self-driving car, took control of the steering and disaled the breaks. If this can happen to human-driven car, then the odds of this happening to a fully computer operated vehicle will be more copious. If some kids had the ability to do this, imagine all of the car crashes and injuries that could occur if many or most cars on the street were self-driven.
The rise of self-driving cars is a bad idea, it's going to happen, many companies are working hard to be the first, and there is money to be made. There are a lot of problems that rise up with cars that drive themselves, being the drivers themselves not paying attention, the computer shutting down, malfunctioning, or being hacked. There is too much risk in a rise of this caliber. | 45
|
c236426 | The face on Mars is just a natural landform. When they took the picture it first looked like a face. Many people wondered if it was an alien made landform. It ended up being just a plain old landform on the red planet.
Many people at first were freaked out or amazed of at the face on the red planet. The story and face appeared in movies, radio talk shows, the web, social media, and magazines. But after they sent out more ships to take pictures of the land form they got a better shot. The picture looked like a natural landform. In the article it says in there "...a natural landform." The scientist at NASA also figured out that it was cloudy on the red planet when they took the picture. "The face on Mars is located at 41 degrees north martian latitude where it was April '98- a cloudy time of year on the red planet."Some of the cloud or mist could of been right over the landform when the picture was taken.
The Martian looks like a butte or mesa that is around the American West. "What the picture actually shows is the Martian equivanlent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West."It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plains of Idaho," says Garvin."
As you can tell from the evidence provided the Face on Mars is not really a face. It is just a landform on the red planet. It was cloudy the day they took it. They got better pictures and investigated it. The picture actully is quite close to the Middle Butte in the Snake RIver Plains of Idaho. | 23
|
01d2df1 | The Future of Driverless Cars
Could you think about yourself not having to worry about driving your car anymore? This is becoming a possibility with all the new technology automobile companies are using to make this happen. But, there are some people that are opposed to this idea becasue of some problems that could come from this This idea also has a majority of supporters too which myself is one of them. There is some bad things about it dealing with traffic and accidents but there is stress relief for not having to drive and not worrying about the road. Also you would be able to do whatever you want while the car is driving to your destination.
I support the idea of the self driving car for many reasons that will soon help all drivers. "The combination of all this input is necessary for the driverless car to mimic the skill of a human at the wheel." With the cars technology ability to be able to mimic the human driver is a huge factor for self driving because it can do all the driving that a human does normally. Some people especially hate driving because it casues them stress and anger so I think if every car was self driving there would be no problems, no traffic, and no accidents to worry about. "As a result, in most states it is illegal even to test computer-driven cars." This quote is talking about how only few states let companies test autonomous cars which hinders the developement of the cars and their safety for all of us because how can you make a better car if you cant test in in real situations. This is a problem with the testing becaus ethe car cant become better and solve the problems if there is not testing done.
On the other hand of the argument there is many things still wrong with the cars and their saftey. "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at faultthe driver or the manufacturer?" This is a big problem witht he cars because technology usually fails at some points in time and if this causes a big accident and people are hurt it will cause so much frustration and confusion on everyone invloved. Another point about the problems of the car is "This means the human driver must remain alert and be ready to take over when the situation requires." The quote has a big meaning because whats the point of having self driving cars that you need to worry about while its driving? "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." The whole point of the self driving cars is its ability to be able to do these things so it should be able to switch could be developed later on.
So in conclusion the self driving cars in my perspective are a good idea but it will come with soem complications as does everythign else. This would be a huge step for the human race and would benefit alot of people. The technology will grow and the problems will become less until we have reached the point where there is no problems with the cars and their abilities. | 34
|
c1dabba | The article that is called "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" is about the dangers that you could come upon if you go to or explore Venus. Some challenges that can come with when exploring Venus, are temputure, gravity, its atmosphere, body damage, or even death. There have been many mission that scientists have planned to go to Venus.
The first danger that Venus definately has, is its thick atmosphere that's almost 97 percent carbon dioxide that blankets the planet. This is true, because it says "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus." Also no scientists want to go there, because of the even more challenging clouds that are highly corrosive sulfuric acid in the planet's atmosphere. This is also true, because the passage says "Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere.
The second danger that Venus's includes, is its very hot temputures. The passage talks about how the surface temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, which could even melt a submarine at the bottom of the ocean, and its atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than Earth's. Venus also has the hottest surface temputure out of all the planets in our solar system. These dangers are found from the passage and it says "On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our planet." "...such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquefy many metals. Also notable, Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system...".
Scientists now have been testing simplified electronics made from silicon carbide in a simulator that simulates the chaos of Venus's surface, and so far they have lasted weeks in those conditions. This was found in the passage and it says "... some simplified electronics made of silicom carbon have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions." Another project the NASA is working on to get to the planet is a technology from the 1800's and played an important role during World War two, these devices make calculations by the use of gears and levers. This was also found in the passage and it says "Another project is looking back to an old technology called mechanical computers. These devices were first envisioned in the 1800's and played an important role in the 1940's during World War II." "... but these devices make calculations by using gears and levers and do not require electronics at all."
Striving to meet the challenges of Venus have been proven to be hard, because of human curiosity which will lead us to intiminating endeavors. We should not be limited by the danger and doubts and decide not to explore. Instead we should explore to gain more experience and new technology. | 23
|
ab84f00 | Dear State Senator,
For years, the presidential election has been running with an Electoral College, one in which the public does not vote for their choice canidate directly, but instead for a slate of electors to have a final deciding vote. Although the system could have worked like a breeze when first originated-- a point to be reckoned with, since I do not see how the system ever correctly displayed the citizens of America-- the Electoral College method has proven itself to be un-deomcratic, unfair, and an unjustly irrational system.
Simply stated, the Electoral College does not allow an accurate representation of voter's beliefs, taking their votes and twisting, manipulating them into a deciding vote from electors. The popular vote can be seen as an input/output machine, the people's own votes going in the contraption, and once inside, the input is stretched and exagerated to output a "neater" electoral vote out of 538. While some argue that the Electoral College vote is usually rather close to the popular vote, it just isn't the same as when the Constution loosely states America as a 'for the people, by the people' nation.
Several times throughout history, the Electoral college has swayed the presidential election in a completely different route than what the outcome of the popular vote would have been. The perfect example, constantly brought up in arguments against the Electoral college, is the 2000 election with main canidates of Republican George Bush and Democrat Al Gore. Through the popular vote, it is clearly seen that a majority of voters chose Al Gore to be their president. Through the process of the electoral college and manipulation of votes, though, the Presidental canidate ended with George Bush winning the election with a 271 electoral votes versus a 266 pointed toward Gore, thus creating an entirely different viewpoint of the people.
The idea of an Electoral College is also what has swung possible voters out of voting rooms, the voting method's 'winner takes all' outlook overriding. With the set up of the Electoral college, popular voters decievingly decide for a slate of electors instead of a President. For example, if a majority of Florida electors voted for Bush, the entirety of Florida's 29 votes are down for Bush, even though not all electors really did vote that way. Those citizens in states who do not fit with what large majority of voters believe are discouraged in voting for their own canidate knowning that, no matter what, it's almost certain their state will end up giving its votes to the canidate they oppose. This can lead voters to not voting at all, creating an even less accurate election while the country pushes citizens to vote, frowning down on them if they do not.
Besides major points, there are many smaller faults wiithin the Electoral college. In example, there is always the possibility of a slate voting for a canidate that differs from the one they have pratically promised to vote for. The fate of our country is put into the hands of the 538 members of the electoral college, opposed to the vastly greater full population of American citizens. Also, with the 538 Electoral College members being an even number, although rare, it is more likely for there to be a tie than if the popular vote was used in deciding the presidential canidate.
A pro Electoral college argument is that the citzens in swing states-- states that are likely to go either way in an election instead of an almost certian outcome-- are more likely to pay attention to ad campaigns knowing that their state is most likely what will decide the winner of the election. Advocates say that they are, on average, most likely to be the most thoughtful voters, and that the most thoughtful voters should be the ones to decide our nations outcome. This outlook is littered with flaws, first starting off with the fact that swing states get more media coverage than the rest of the nation. These voters are valued more than others and are given more information to have an informed vote. Besides the fact that it is proposterous to value the vote of one citizen over another, this isn't fair to members of other states who recieve virtually no coverage due to canidates feeling like the state's vote has been secured since day one. The nation as a whole should recieve all the facts together with equal coverage, so that each and every voter can become a thoughtful one, and not only those located in swing states.
All in all, the decision to abolish the Electoral College is a backed up one, the facts and details there to support, meanwhile advocates for the practically ancient method don't have many solid counters to prove their point.
I hope you take this letter and it's claims into consideration.
Thank you for your time,
Floridian citizen PROPER_NAME | 56
|
77cdf2e | Venus is the brightest planet seen from Earth, the second planet from the sun, and one of the most dangerous planets for space scientists to explore. At just around "800 degrees Fahrenheit" the planet is rich with carbon dioxide, corrosive fulfuric acid clouds, and atmospheric pressure (3). These conditions alone should be solid reasons as to why the planet should not be touched, but despite this scientists continue to look towards it for research. Some of the supporting reasons as to why Venus should be explored are actually quite intriguing and can provide good support for reasoning exploration. Although the conditions of the planet can be horrednous the fact that the planet gives us Earth like pasts to study, vehicles are being made in order to combat the hazzardous areas, and technologies are making studying more possible, the planet may be worth investigating after all.
The fact that Venus was once like Earth is just one good reason as to why the planet is worth being studied. Even scientists believe that the planet was previously embodied with oceans that could have "supported various forms of life" (4). These long lost oceans are not the only Earth like feature that this planet has; according to paragraph four Venus has "valleys, mountains, and craters" that also match Earth's description (4). These features of the planet are fascinating and can help scientists uncover more of Venus' past which makes it a great planet to examine.
Venus has many earth like features worth studying but the different ways in which Venus can be visited is also a great reason to continue the research being done on the planet. NASA has been studying the use of vehicles that may be used to study the planet in the near future. They describe it as a "blimp-like vehicle" that hovers over the surface for about "30 or so miles" (5). This mechanism allows the blimp to stay out of reach from the horrendous temperatures and atmosphere of Venus. It also gives the blimp a way to maintain a sufficient amount of "solar power" (5). This blimp is one of many great upcoming studies on what kinds of options we have for reaching such a dangerous planet.
Futuristic vehicles are not the only positive part of upcoming Venus exploration, for technology in itself is continuing to evolve and provide ways to research the planet. For example, in paragraph 7, it shows how one electronic made out of "silicon carbide" was able to last "three weeks" under a simulation of Venus' harsh planet conditions. Another type of technology mentioned in paragraph 7 is from the past; they are called mechanical computers. These machines are "more resistant to pressure, heat, and other forces," which is exactly what type of climate Venus harnesses. Both of these types of technologies provide a great way to look at examining Venus and why the pursuit of the planet is, and can be, worth it.
Even though Venus may be a dangerous planet to explore, its earth like terrain, specially designed vehicles made to withstand
harsh conditions, and advancing technology made for research
are some of the main reasons why the planet is worth studying. In the future technology may be able to resist harsh conditions and vehicles may be able to reach closer to the surface without being damaged. The terrain may even be looked at more closely to uncover some of the secrets of Venus' past. Before all of these changes can be made they must be looked at, judged, and accepted as reasons to overlook the dangers of the planet and to expand on our knowledge with the exploration of planets. | 34
|
0be5034 | The author tells the reader how Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents because no ones been on the planet and metal would just liquefy so we can't send nothing nor no one up to Venus. But I think that the the author would like to know how it's like up there besides knowinf that it's hot, and maybe would like to know what we could do up there in those types of conditions.
Like many other planet most people would say we can't live in those types of conditions but scintist found out we could live on some planets and also grow food on some of those planets. So the author might think that it's worth finding out that if we could at least grow plants there since some plants can suvive and grow in real hot conditions.
Another posible reason why the author might would want to see if there is living life on Venus. Lots of people talk about there being more then just people on one planet so there could be some form of life on another. If we could grow food on some plants that could also mean that there's life on that planet too. So even thought it's extremelly hot on Venus doesn't mean that there isn't a form of living life on there. | 12
|
c97615c | I persanuly love to be a Seagoing cowboy becuase I get to go sightseeing. One time I was so lucky to go on a gondola ride in venice,Italy, a city with streets of water. It was a opportunity of a life time my frend helped me so much with this two. I use to have 2 part time jobs and with don I could have just one job and best part I love it.
I hope that you join becuase it woud be wonderfull to have you. You would be helping horses,young cows, and mules get to go sightseeing when you are done and explore. and thar is a way to pass time, especially on your way home. you can tabel tennis fencing boxing reading games. Its all rilly fun plus it helps time pass no matter what thar will all was be something going on.
But seagoing cowboys was much more then a adventure. it opened me up to the world to me im gratefull for the opportunity. It made me more aware of people of other countries and their needs. My first mision was to go to greece and i had 335 horses plus. I all so be for ariving i ternd 18 when i got thar the pacific war.
In conclusion i hope you join and have a good day. Also this is not a joke you need to be focest and willingly help the team if thay need help. If you need help ask if you dont you might endup fired. And be carfull THAR IS WATER you may slip and fall. but i hope you join and help the couse. | 23
|
f9da9bf | The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents because Venus is known as Eath's "twin" and is closest planet to Earth, and the untold mysteries it holds.
Exploring Venus to study is infact dangerous but as the aouthor states in the text " Today, Venus still has some features that are analgous to thos on Earth". This line explains that the possibilities of surving in Venus is about 50/50, it also meant that if Venus has these various feathers that Earth have, then it's the chances of being able to go there is hiher because of feathers like; oceans, valleys, mountains, craters, and differnt forms of life. It also says that " NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray".
This is significant because it explained how the NASA already have plans and intructions for this event that they are hoping to make it happen. Furthermore, it says how the process and devices would help them to go on Venus and how it is survivable for humans because the temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, and machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to the NASA's knowledge of Venus.
This article shows all the possibilities of surviving on Venus to study the Venus with their new machines, and innovations for the sucess. | 23
|
dd43d5b | The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus' believes that Venus, Earth's twin, needs to be explored.
Venus has very extreme conditions, but according to the author nothing us humans can't handle.
With a little bit of creativity and curosity, humans can learn about Venus.
Scientist have sent numerous spacecrafts to land on Venus, but most have only lasted for a few hours.
With this it is hard to gather information, but why would scientists even want to send spacecrafts to it if they think there is no chance of anyone ever living there?
In the article it states,"Astonomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system."
A long time ago, Venus could have supported various forms of life.
If it could then, than maybe there is a chance in the future for it to.
Venus conditions are dangerous, but the author says we can find ways around them.
For example, in the story, it states,"Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape."
Having a vehicle stay out of the high pressure, high temperature area could be a safe alternative to explore Venus.
The only issue with it would be that peering out of a ship can only provide the scietists with limited information on the ground conditions.
NASA is very creative and has started creating electronics made of silicon carbide so they can withstand Venus's conditions.
For example, in the story 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." The spacecrafts that were previously sent there only lasted hours, so NASA is making improvements.
Hopefully, NASA can continue on this road to improving and one day get humans to Venus safely.
"Curiosity killed the cat" is a famous saying.
If we do not explore Venus now, human curiosity will lead us to many equally or more dangerous things.
The author supports their idea very well and makes multiple vaild points explaining why we should become a little more creative so we can explore Venus now. There would no longer be any curosity about it, making it safer. | 23
|
ec228d8 | I believe that you should join the Seagoing Cowboys. It is really fun, you can see many different places, and it feels good to help. I am a Seagoing Cowboy myself, and I think you should be too. You would definitly love it.
Being a Seagoing Cowboy isn't always hard work and non-stop rushing around all the time. Usually on the trip back when you dont have animals to care for it is super fun. You can wittle, play table tennis, box, read, or play any other game. It is still hard work but it can still be fun. When we take trips back I love it because we all hang out and play games.
When you are a Seagoing Cowboy you get to see many different places. It is a big opportunity that is very rare. You can see beautiful places such as China, Italy, New Orleans, The Acropolis in Greece, or just see places on the way there like the Panama Canal. It costs a lot of money to just make one of those trips. This way you can see all of those places without spending a dime.
A Seagoing Cowboy is a great way to help other people in need.
It will feel really good when you are on the trip back and you know in your mind that you just helped a city or a country with their problems. Yes you have all of the things you need to live but helping someone else who has nothing really makes you feel good. After that you can go and think to your self I could have just saved a starving child or family.
So in the end I believe you should be a Seagoing Cowboy because it is fun, you can travel to new places, and it makes you feel good. I really hope that you will become a Seagoing Cowboy.
-Best of luck, Luke Bomberger | 23
|
48c70fe | In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents adequately well. The author uses factual information and describes some of the reasons why studying Venus would be rewarding. The author states "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system" in paragraph 4. By including the information from the quote above, the author allows the reader to understand why studying Venus would be beneficial and crucial for further planetary study. The author also states a feasible idea that the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) thought of for studying Venus in the following quote "The National Aeronatics and Space Administration (NASA) has one particular idea for sending humans to study Venus." in Paragraph 5. The author then continues to explain the idea, which can be possibly sucessful and would allow for Venus to be studied. Through the explanation of this idea, the author shows that despite the dangers presented Venus can still be studied safely. The author concludes the article with the following quote "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." from paragraph 8. This statement is tenaciously powerful in that it empowers the reader to not be afraid of the dangers and doubts presented by studying Venus, but rather be inspired to think of solutions to overcome the said dangers and doubts. All in all, because of the factual information and examples of ways to study Venus, the author argued the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents very well. | 12
|
5e67004 | Honestly, we shouldnt have the Electoral College. If I voted for a president, I really wouldnt be voting for the president, I would be voting for a state of electors and they would elect the president. Your really not voting for what you want, your really voting for there electors. You dont even know who these electors are or who there gonna vote for. Why should we have this Electoral College if were not even voting for who we want, its like were not even voting. Electors can always defy the will of the people and just vote for who ever they wanted and just turn there back on there own party. Like back in 1960, the segregationists in the Louisiana legislature almost accomplished in replacing the Democratic electors with new electors who would go against John F. Kennedy.
With popular vote there most likely will never be a tie. With the Electoral College there have been cases of really close tie deadlines. As you can tell from the passage, the Electoral College is old and unfair and never should be used. With the winner-take-all system in every state, candidates dont go to states they know they wont win. When the 2000 campaign was going on, seventeen states didn't see the candidates not once, these states were Rhode Island and South Carolina, and voters in twenty-five of one the largest media markets didn't get to see not one campaign ad. | 23
|
bef1ed0 | i think it's pretty much safe for stop driving cars or give them away,and it making people looking bad in sense to .given your cars away will reduicing accidents more people will feeling safe when they walking in the streets and more parents will let their kids playing in the streets without asitated and the air will be good and everyone breath very well and more people will stop getting ticket from police.
taking some one 's cars away will hurt some people 's feeling and this idea sound good to me because some teenagers keep making some fast cars and racing in the streets and there is some time most of them got their self killed or burning a life in the car if they can especially take those cars away it will be more safeand tey will stop dying in cars accident.
''as a result ,70 percent of vauban's families do not own cars,and 57 percent sold car to move to move here''i think those the talk about in this paragraph are acting smart,if all of those have been following those others example sold their and take the money you could probably feeling better or let them take it away from you won't feel good.
''paris bans driving due to smog''that is the most dangerous part in driving cars when it smog in the air ,people have 55 percent chance to got yourself killing or cars crash. this idea was the greatest idea ever. | 12
|
4eb95b7 | Have you ever thought of the advantages of limiting your car usage? Do you even know what driving does to the enviroment? Limiting the amount of times you use your vehicle will reduce the pollution in the world.
To begin with, In 'Source 2: Paris bans driving due to smog' by Robert Duffer, it is stated on lines 14-16 that "congestion was down 60 percent in the capital of France, after five-days of intensifying smog" explaining that without cars, the amount of "congestion" in other words pollution will decrease rapidly. The popular use of cars and motorcycles have forced France to ban driving to clear the smog in their city. Pollution in this city has obviously grown over the years, by reducing the use of these machines has helped the enviroment.
In Addition, 'Source 3: Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota' by Andrew Selsky records that there is a day banning vehicle use as well know as the Day Without Cars in Bogota, Colombia, with an exception of buses and taxis. Selsky wrote "The goal is to promote alternative transportation and reduce smog." With this city of 7 million, the rate of pollution will decrease throughout the years, even with one out of 365 days of not driving.
Lastly, 'Source 1: In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars by Elisabeth Rosenthal, It is explained that the "Residents of [Vauban,Germany] this upsca;e community are suburban pioneers...they have given up their cars." Rosenthal notes that many families are happier without vehicles.
In Conclusion, limiting the usage of cars and vehicles will decrease the amount of air pollution in the world. These 3 sources all gave examples of scenarios without cars and motorcycles, how people have made things work and how pollution has reduced since then. | 23
|
5fa2ac3 | First,Professor. Thomas Huang of the beckman Institute for advanced Science at the University of Illinois working with
Professor. Nicu Sebe of the University of Amsterdam. Dr. Huang and his colleague are developing better ways for humans and computers to communicate which the proces begin when a computer constructs a 3-D computer Model of the Human face that contains all 44 major muscles in the model that must move like Human.
Second,The Facial Expressions of some individuals often show varying degrees of expression and the new emotion-recognition software tracks facial movements in a real face or in the painted face if Mona Lisa. Each expression of a Human is being compared against a neutral face (showing no emotion). In fact us Humans perform the same impressive "calculation" everyday.
Third,Mona Lisa's Demonstration really intended to bring a smile on your face, For example: if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen a similar ad will follow but if your frown the next ad will be different,which makes the classroom computer recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored then it could modify the lesson like an effective human instructor and with the same technology it can be used to make computer-animated faces more expressive for video games or video surgery.
Last,Our Muscles called Orbicularis oculi pars palpabraeus make crow's feet around your eyes, in a false smile the mouth is stretched sideways using the zygomatic major and a different muscle, the risorious. But, to an expert faces don't lie; the muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a smiling politician or celebrity isn't being truthful.
In Conclusion, The Theory of Emotion is about moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions,but it also may help produce them, And empathy may happen at some point of time when we unconsciously imitate another person's facial expressions. | 01
|
c3277c0 | "Abolish the electoral college!" is a famous statement that was made by Bob Dole on whether or not it would be a good idea to keep the electoral college. Though others may disagree and say that our founding fathers established the Electoral College. Also that it was established with the mindset of helping the American people, but i would like to think otherwise. I believe that the we should change the system by which we vote the president of the United States into election by popular vote. For many years we have been using the concept of the Electoral College and for many years, it has lead to unfair calls and the placing of bad leadership in our country. In the article titled, "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong", the author defines what the electoral collage system really is, the author states, " Under the electoral collage system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president." This system is an unfair system, and can not be trusted. It time for change.
The electoral collage is a dishonesty to voters, it is an unfair system. In "The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses of the system are wrong", the author makes a good claim. He or she talks about the winner takes all system that is affiliated with the electoral college. In the 13th paragraph the author specifically says, " Because of the winner-take-all system in each tate, candidates don't spend time in states they know have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races "swing" state." That shows how unfair it is to us as the American people. Certain states may not get a chance to see who their choices are. They are forced to make a decision based on the little we know and the majority of the knowledge comes form the media which is a very unreliable source. " During the2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see the candidates at all." That shows how little our voices are heard in a desion that is crutial for how we go about and make decisions in our everyday lives. We the American people have to rely on states such as Ohio for who our president will be.
There is dishonesty every where you go. More so in the electoral college. When the electors are chosen we have no say so. The state legislatures are the ones responsible for picking the electors. In paragraph 11 of "The indefinsible Electoral College", the author makes a remark that everyone should put into regards. It says "That those electors could always defy the will of the people." Just like people can lie about their age, electors san also fib about their position or party in which they are representing. The author also mentions in paragraph 11, : In the same vein, "faithless" electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever the please."Not everyone can be trusted, and the dishonesty is another reason why we should do away with the electoral college and change to election by popular vote. With the election by popular, we are assured that there is fair play even though some of us may not get our voice heard completely.
People who are for the concept of the electoral college may argue other wise. For instance, in the article called, "In Defense of the Electoral College", the author argues that " The Electoral College despite its lack of democratic pedigree; all are practical reasons, not liberal or conservative reasons", meaning its idea of support. I believe the Electoral College is an overrated nor practical.
I am in favor of abolishing the electoral collage amd changing to election of by popular vote. With the system of election of popular vote, you will be sure that the system is fair,honest, and speakes the voices of the American people. As a sentor you should take the best interest of the American people to heart. | 45
|
7e86a5c | Space travel is not new to humanity nor is it something that has not already been accomplished. With the breach of Mars's soil having already occured scientist and space explorers have set their sights on the next challenge, Venus. Venus is sometimes closer to Earth than Mars and at other times Mars is the one closer to Earth, but of the two Venus is the closest match to Earth "in terms of density and size" and thus has been named Earth's "twin" making it a place of great interest for scientist, and those interested in space exploration because no other planet comes as close to matching Earth's conditions. Studying Venus could give hints about the future of Earth.
In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author gives strong support to the idea that the pursuit of studying Venus is a worthy cause despite the dangers presented by the task. Knowledge of Venus would be extremely beneficial because Venus is one of the most interesting planets in Earth's solar system because of it's similarity to Earth. With the large number of similarities that Venus currently shares with Earth it wouldn't be terribly surprising or strange if Venus was once a planet "covered largely with oceans and" that "could support various forms of life". There is no way to tell if any of this is true, however without being able to travel to Venus and explore the planet. Only by exploring the planet and studying pieces of the planet such as small bits of land can noteworthy discoveries about Venus be made. Confirming or disproving the Earth-like Venus idea is not the only reason why studying Venus is a worthy pursuit. Another reason is that "human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors" and the curiousity of humans and their travels on Earth "should not be limited by dangers and doubts" according to paragraph 8. This statements shows that gaining the ability to study the planet Venus is about more than just the planet and also expands to include the breaking of the limitations that stop exploration due to "dangers". By expanding to meet the challenge that Venus presents humans as whole will prove that they have the ability to explore and learn about nearly everything removing some of the limits of human exploration.
In conclusion the author's support of the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers is extremely strong because the author gives noteworthy reasons as to how the pursuit would be beneficial to exploration and humans in general. The author states that the pursuit of studying Venus will open doors into the pursuit of studying other dangerous places, or areas of interest such as animals, and others. The author also sites the idea that more knowledge of the Earth's "twin" could in fact help give insight on Earth as well by giving humans an idea of what Earth could become in the future and perhaps by studying Venus scientist could find a way to prevent Earth from becoming Venus-like. The author's reasonings are strong and prove to be thought invoking and the author avoids the idea of risks that are not needed. | 34
|
a346bdd | Driverless cars are a thing of the future.
With as many companies working towards driverless cars: Google, Toyota, BMW, GM, Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan, I think we'll have streets full of the in no time.
I think driverless cars are a fantastic idea.
Humans have flaws, and machines do too, but if we could manufacture a car smart enough to know how to navigate in traffic on its own, and when and where to stop a humans flaws would not be an issue.
We have too many distractions in our lives, and needless to say we're thinking about those things while we're driving.
"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. Further improvements in sensors and computer hardware and software to make driving safer are also leading to cars that can handle more and more driving tasks on their own." -paragraph 5.
This indicates that driverless cars are safer than manual ones, and that they use less energy.
With cars as sensitive as these, there would be fewer accidents as well.
There are a few issues with the case: "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at faultthe driver or the manufacturer?" -paragraph 9.
On the other hand, by the time driverless cars are on the streets we should have most legal issues worked out.
All in all, I think self-driving cars are safer than manual ones.
With as many distractions as we have in our lives, we really do not need another thing to be worrying about. | 23
|
d0bb1cc | Greenhouse gases, smog, pollution, and traffic jams. What do all of these have in common? They all come from vehicles. In many countries, they're changing that. Countries such as Colombia, France, Germany, and even America are limiting car usage. The affects of these countries going nearly car-free are quite helpful and convienient. Some of the advantages of this are that citizens get more exercise, less polution as well as less gasoline used, and traffic jams are prevented.
Exercise, being one of the factors that's lacking when people drive everywhere, can be changed just by simply choosing to walk, run, bike, skate, etc. instead. That's just what many people are doing. Vauban, Germany has a new approach for transportation. Rather than driving to stores along highways that are quite distant from neighborhoods, stores are placed closer on a main street that's within walking distance. Also in Colombia, "Parks and sports centers also have bloomed throughout the city"(Andrew Selsky, paragraph 28).
Pollution is one of the biggest problems on Earth thanks to cars. In Paris, a partial driving ban was enforced so that every other day either even or odd-numbered license plates would not be permitted to leave home with their cars. While in Bogota, Colombia, for a few years there's been a day without them completely. Other than buses and taxis of course. This annual day "has seen the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths"(Andrew Selsky), which helps with the exercise factor as well as lessoning the pollution and traffic jams due to driving. Americans have also been saving money by not even buying a car to begin with. The number of people with liscenses and cars has definetly dropped over the years.
From getting more exercise to reducing pollution, going without a car definetly has it's advantages. Thanks to bills, bans, and laws, the dependency of the car has gone down as well. So, will Earth one day be car-free? | 23
|
1bd1109 | Did you know that Venus was a planet and is that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit? Well it actually is and Venus is the second planet from the sun. Venus is sometimes called the Evening star because it is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky. Making it simple to spot in the sky.
Venus is referred to as "Earth's twin". Venus is the closest planet to earth in terms of density and size. Also it is the closest according to distance too. Earth and Venus are like neighbors. Venus was just around the corner, Humanshas sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world. The previous mission was unmanned and for a amazing reason. No apcecraft have survived the landing for more then a few hours. we should send more. Despite the danger but we haven't touched venus more then three decades.
The author supported the idea of studying this planet is a worthly pursuit because we have to know more about this planet then just knowing we are the closest out of all the planets. He stated,"Our travel 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". The author claims that space is an important study according to this statement. | 12
|
221e8a6 | Why would you want to explore the hottest planet in our solar system?! Well the author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," trys to explain why people would want to do such a thing!
In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus," the author explains that venus is one of the hottest planets in our solar system and that humans want to explore it?! He mentions that that Venus is earths old twin. Keep in mind humans have never set foot on Venus or even taken a shuttle there, the only thing that has ever come close to Venus is a Shuttle with no one in it.
Old twins? The author states,"Often referred to as Earth's "twin," Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size". Later in the article he mentions how people suspect that Venus used to just like Earth,"The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters".
The author mentions how scientist are trying to come up with ways to explore Venus seeing how its to hot for humans to get close to the ground. One way scientist have come up with ways to explore Venus is having humans go in a shuttle and stay up in the sky where its about 600 degrees colder and use light to try and shine through Venus's atmosphere and getting a view of it from way up in the sky but still not being able to set foot on it to collect samples.
Would you still be interested in exploring such a hot and somewhat useless planet?! The author really goes in depth about the ways we could explore Venus and how Venus is different and simular to earth but never disscusses how much exploring Venus would be. | 12
|
7ba0526 | In the article about driverless cars, it talks about how driverless cars can help people. But can they? Driverless cars can be very dangerous in some ways. People can fall asleep just as easily as driving a normal car. They fall asleep in these driverless cars because they think "Oh it's in control, I can snooze for a bit." When no, you can't. You have to be alert at all times. In paragraphs 7-10 it talks about how authorities and the law are getting involved with these driverless cars ideas. If the law doesn't approve of the driverless cars ideas it's beacuse they are aware of the people and children walking across the streets or crossing roads. If the driver in the driverless car isn't paying attention to the pedestrians, the car might not stop in time for the driver to take control.
Driverless cars do have benefits though. It does help alert the driver with any dangers up ahead or construction up ahead and has the driver take the wheel. But like what is said before, there are still some issues. Driverless cars cannot navigate on its own, you have to steer and be in control at all times if you want to get somewhere. The car isn't Knight Rider. We still have to pay attention to the car and its surroundings and one day, it might be too late, and you crash because you couldn't get ahold of the wheel because the car wouldn't shift it to you. In paragraphs 4-6 it talks about sensors in the cars, which is a good thing, but they could malfunction and then you're messed up from then on. The sensors help to alert the driver with anything that is out of its control. But it still can't navigate and that isn't very helpful, now is it? These are reasons the cars can be dangerous.
So in conclusion, driverless cars aren't all that great. They still have faults and could easily malfunction and then you don't have any control over the car anymore. These cars are not safe for anyone, and a drunk driver could easily take advantage of that. No car is going to be perfect, it'll still have dents and scratches in the long run and just like any other, it willeventually crash. Drivers need to be aware of these cons instead of focussing on the pros. Because no car will be perfect nor will it fully develop to drive on its own. It's not a living thing, its a machine for transport. Try focussing on what could go bad, before you get behind that driverless car and find out in the long run. Are "Driverless cars" really driverless? Think about it before you buy one. | 34
|
065c240 | Outer space is a mystery within itself, but the addition of the planets and stars are just an expansion to those mysteries. The article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" was written for readers to understand how a planet that may be different in design can be the most important reason as to why it should be taken a look at. The author compares and contrasts Venus with Earth and Mars to emphasize what Venus has to offer. Venus may not be the easiest task to complete, but that should encourage people to push the exploration of the planet.
Venus may have a variation of attributes compared to Earth and Mars, but that shouldn't stop people from exploring the planet. Since Earth and Venus are considered "twins," they are similar according to their, "...density and size, and occasionally their distance too." (2) The author also mentions how Venus could have once been the, "...most Earth-like planet in our solar system." With that being said, if Venus was similar to Earth in its lifetime, then it could answer pondering questions like "Is there any other signs of life on other planets?" Just like Earth, Venus has, "valleys, mountains, and craters." (4) Venus' similar characteristics to Earth makes it an interesting mission for scientists.
Sending man to the moon wasn't the easiest trip, but it got done. So, why shouldn't Venus be explored too? Venus is said to have, "...hostile conditions on the surface," (5) and it is considered, "inhospitable." (4) Both phrases do not appear to be the most promising when deciding if landing on Venus is the best choice, but beyond those risks could be life changing discoveries. This mission is impossible because humans are able to make, "machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully."
Traveling to Venus doesn't have to be the most difficult plan. Space travel already is a timely mission, but Venus is said to, "...sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit." If Venus is a close visit, then scientists should be even more compelled to search the planet. Scientist have come up with smart ideas to observe Venus like, "a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 miles above the Venusian landscape." (5) With this the vehicle is close enough to explore without humans dying or the vehicle frying. The heat is dangerous, but scientists could obtain important information they've been wanting to find out.
The author informs readers on the risks of traveling to Venus. Venus is not the safest place to be close to, but dangers have never stopped people from making trips into space in the past. Venus provides many opportunities that people have to be willing to take and learn from. Danger is nothing new to society, so traveling to Venus is only the newest obstacle to bypass. | 34
|
bf6f0e4 | venus is the closetst planet to the earth in terms of density and size and occasionally.i think that studying in venus is a worthy pursuit despte the danger because venus is the second planet in our solar systerm that is mean that the sun is really cose to that planet is is really haot in this planet ."each previous mission was unmanned ,and for good reason ,sin no spacecraft survivedthe landing for more than a few hours.in the article"a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blanckets venus."
the national aeronautics and space administration has on particularly compelling idea for sending humans to study venus.NASSApossible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of venus would allow scientists to float above the fray.the planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such
as valleys,mountains and craters.
The author supports the idea that studying venu is a worthy pursuits despite the
danger it because on the planet surface temparature average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what
we esperience on our own planet."studying in venus is
worthy pursuit despite the danger ike the say in the article that imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roilling venusian landscape for an exemple some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of venu surface."
More importantly resaech cannot take samples of rock ,gas or anything else from a distance .many reaseach are working on innovation that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of venus.striving to meet the challenge presented by venus has value ,not only because of insight to be gained on the planet itself but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors.
However peering at venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmospher rendering standard forms and photography and videography ineffective . | 12
|
933c51d | What i think about driverless cars is that they might be a bad thing because, there is so much technaligy in one car its becomes like a human body if one of the cameras stop working then its like becoming blind in one eye. You can still see but not as efectivley as before. You can fix a camera but how much will it cost.
What if you sensors malfunction you just lost you're hearig, sence of touch smell taste. How would the car know what to do. the car, blind like a chicken with it head cut off. Unless there is a stearing wheel you can save your self or a emergency hand brake. How much does it cost to buy a sensor and to make one how manny days will it take for a new one to arive. I think it a bad idea becase somthimes new can be bad and old can be the best. | 12
|
4a8af26 | I believe that driverless cars should be allowed for everyone. The cars could help certain people if they are occupied with something else. Some people may not be able to have a driverless car because even though it's driverless, they still have to be there in case of an emergency. Other people may just ignore the signals of the car and it could cause a wreck to occur.
Driverless cars could benefit many people in many different ways. The driver may need to take an important business call, and they can do that while the car is still going. The person could also have an injury and need to go to the emergency room, but have no one else to take them there. If the person has children one of their kids could need something, so they could help them while still going where they need to go. Also, the driver could've woken up late and needs to hurry to work. They could finish getting ready in their car or eat their breakfast. They may need to finish their make up or brush their hair and you can't do that with both of your hands on the wheel and your eyes on the road.
I also believe it would be diffucult to know who is at blame for a wreck. The car could mess up and it would be the manufacturers fault, but if the driver is not paying attention it would be their fault. The driver may not want to take responsibilty and admit to not paying attention to the signals of the car. The idea of having cameras in the car to watch the driver is very interesting. It may feel weird being watched by something, but it would help figure out who is to blame.
The idea of driverless cars is a little frightening though. There are people that may take advantage of it and not pay attention to whenever they need to take control of the car. The idea is also excellent for someone that may need the time to do something else. I approve of the idea, but there is always the slight chance of someone messing it up. Hopefully if driverless cars become a thing, they will make everything safer and nothing bad will happen because of them. If driverless cars become a regular thing, I think they need to be figured out and practiced with a lot more. | 23
|
3b3ddba | One beleives,that limiting car usage can have a positive effect and we can gain
Advantages to this. Source 1 "In German Suburb, life goes on with out cars" (Rosenthal) and source 2 "Paris bans driving due to somg" (Duffer) what both these sources have in common is the fact that both authors talk about the advantages of L
i miting car usage. In Source 1 "German suburb,life goes on with out cars. "Vauban, Germany have given up their cars As a Result, 70
Percent of vauban's Families do not own cars, and 57 percent sold a car to move here"
In this incident, Families do not own cars or have sold a car to move to Vauban Because most of the families and mothers dont feel as tense and feel happier it also help reduce air pollution.
"Automobiles are the linchpin of suburbs where middle-class families from chicago to shanghai tend to make thier homes" Here Cars are the linchpin of suburbs where experts say, It is a huge impediement to current efforts to drastically reduce greenhouse gas. In source 2 "Paris Bans driving due to smog "After days of near-record pollution, paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city. In this incident, Paris enforced a Ban on cars so it can clear up the polluted air with somg in the city. "On Monday motorists with even-numberd license plates were orderd to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22-euro fine (31$) the same would go for odd numberd plates. Here, Cars owners would be fined If they were found driving and not leaving thier cars at home in effort to reduce the Air pollution smog of the city. In essence I feel that If we continue this in diffrent countries our Air pollution Rates can go down in percentage and we woulden't need to worry about It anymore don't you? | 12
|
7df9a1f | Venus is very hostile and would be very hard to live on. its the hottest planet in the solar system and ita atmosphere is 92 times stronger than Earths. Living on the surface of Venus would be impossible but like the author states, living 30 miles abpve the surface might not be so bad. It would e the only option if we want to live on Venus but theres a pretty good chance it could work.
One thing the author does very well is that the author does a good job of supporting the the idea of studying Venus even though its a very dangerous planet. He stronlgy suggest to study Venus ans eventually get us to live there. Paragraph 4 says "If our sister planet is so inhospitable, why are scientists even discussing further visits to its surface? Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system." This shows that even though Venus is very dangerous, scientists still love Venus and really want to learn more to eventually getting to live there above the clouds. And it proves that the author of the article was right about pushing to study Venus becasue thats exactly what the scientists think.
Another way the author does a good idea of supporting how Venus should be studied more is by explaining how NASA wants to send people to Venus to study it more and to continure to learn about Venus. Paragraph 5 says "(NASA) has one particularly compelling idea for sending humans to study Venus. NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape.......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 zlevels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." The author proves how humans could stay on venus to learn more about it and study it way more. The author proves that living abouve the surface and clouds would be way easier for humans to do because the surface is too harsh.
In conclusion, the author did a very good job of supporting the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. Sure Venus is a very harsh and hostile world, but that is mostly on the surface where the harshest conditions are. Its way safer above the clouds and that is where humans could study Venus more. | 34
|
05fa0f0 | The author details supports it's idea on the suggests of studying venus is a worthy pursuite the dangers it presents. In this passage called the challenge of exporing the venus .
venus is getting referred as earths "Twinn" over time humans have been sending numerouse spacecrafts to land on the cloud-draped world where no spacecraft is able to survied the landing for no more the a few hours . There a thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxdie blankets venus in our solar system. But did you kniw the avergae temperature is over 800 degrees one hot planet. Did you also know that farenneit and the atmosheric pressure is also 90 times greater that what humans experience on our own planet . Notable venus has the hottest sureface temperatue or any planet in our whole solar systam. They say that the weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes powerful earthquakes and frequent lighting strikes to probe seeking to land on its sureface. Wow our planet is so inhospitble it includes valleys and mountains and craters . so instand od sending spacecraft out they used a computer that was made in the 1800 cause that computer that does not require using electroics this computer goes off on of calculations by using gears and levers modern computer are enormously powerful , flexible and quick to extreme physical conditions . Humans will likely lead us into many equally intimdating endeavors . to where it should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and invaion to the challenge of exploring venus. | 01
|
a556f77 | So, you want to tell me that the rock and craters on Mars are aliens? Myself belive it is not myself and fellow scientist find this to be true. Back in 1976 I got my first glipse at the figure on the surface it made me think it was alien until the Mars Rover proved it could not possibly be made by aliens.
When we first released the piture it set the world on fire as much talk about the face on Mars it made us look like we made the discovery of a life times work we all shared the cridit for finding the face. Nasa became the biggest hit around some took advantage to that some did not others did.
Allthough we proved it to be a natullary formed crater by using the Mars rover. Even after this a group of them left because they belived aliens were real and belived aliens created this monumentail artfact which would change space to how we know it to be today.
Mars did look like it had small shacks which they thought was house arfound the massive rock. Mars has a very rocky layer on its top it gives Mars the ability to have craters which from a distance look like shacks.
The one thing the told me is what I can't explain it to this day I have no respouce to it they said do you see the crocked grim on its face every time we look at this figure it has a differt face which is hard to explain.
I'll tell you what I told him though is that you can never underesitmate the force of gravity. Gravity pull masses on to that face of Mars shaping differantly every time.
As conclusion the belivers in aliens started a foundation. The foundation was called alien were here. They could not prove that they were right so they foundation had to swith to make more sense to have an resonable idea the new foundation also died off. The new foundation has The Brithish were here which everone new so they had no purpose they ended up giving up on any chance of company. Well as you can see I'm doing well and listing to aliens are not here dot net people the chance was silm, but it is a cool artifact. Still to this day in time when people first see that piture they think aliens are amoungest which they could be right, but they are wrong has a better chance of happing around here in the USA. | 12
|
ab81c08 | The face on Mars is 100% just a natural formation of rocks and sand/dust. Pictures show this, everytime NASA does take a picture of it there are the same results. Plus if it was alien why would NASA publish the pictures. If this was proof of aliens it would put people into freak out mode.
The first thing is that giant rock formations aren't uncommon in the cydonia section of Mars. In fact there are a whole bunch of different kinds of rocks just like the face, only that those are normal looking. They don't look like faces. The article even says that the picture actually shows the Martian equivalent of a butte or mesa-landforms common around the American West. Even Garvin says ''It reminds me most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho,'' then he keeps going to say ''That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the Face on Mars.''
The second thing is close up images. Over the years NASA has been taking pictures of this formation. Each time they take a picture of face, the face starts to look more and more like a rock formation. NASA even publicly posted pictures on the web, and all diferent kinds of media to show what the formation looks like. So, NASA must of been pretty confident in what they were saying the picture was. Plus NASA is made of the top of the line professionlas. They aren't made up of people who dropped out of highschool. They are made up of people who have graduated from some of the most advanced and instutionalized colleges.
My third thing is if it was alien, why would NASA publicly show the pictures. In the article, it makes NASA look like they were trying to get people to get away from the alien idea. By the sound of it, I would take a guess and say if it was alien, NASA would do everything in their power to keep the images from getting out into the public. Another thing is that at one point people were saying that the picture taken on April 5, 1998, was not liable because of the fact that 98 was a cloudy time of year on the Red Planet. So, NASA on April 8, 2001, took another photo in the year 2001 and 2001 was not a cloudy year for the Red Planet .The photo even further backed up the fact that the formation on Mars is just another giant rock, not some alien face or artifact.
So in the end why would this be an alien face or aritfact. NASA has publicly proven that it is just a formation of rocks and dust/sand. Plus if NASA didn't wan't us to know about aliens or anything of the sort, why would they publicly anounce and show pictures of the Face of Mars. That is why the Face of Mars is not related to anything alien at all and is just another formation in the cydonia sector of Mars. | 34
|
627aaf9 | Facial Action Coding System should be used in classrooms. This new technology can help students avoid unwanted articles or advertisments, recieve more help, and become genuinely happy.
When students go online to do research for a project, they come accross different websites. The internet is full of useful information, but it can also show us innapropriate images or unwanted advertisments. Students can get rid of this by just frowning. Paragraph six states, "...if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad will be different." The new technology can help students avoid bad articles and advertisments. Students will recieve more research material that is reliable and useful for projects.
Not only is their studying going to improve, but their comprehension in lessons. When students study or go through a lesson online, they may become confused or even bored. Students will make a confused facial expression, and the computer will recognize it. Paragraph six of the article states, "'A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored,' Dr. Huang predicts. 'Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor.'" The computer will give the student more help as if it were a real instructor. Their comprehension of the lesson will be better because they will get more help. Students would recieve a better instruction that is compatible with their own needs.
Making facial expresions to make the computer help the students learn will also make the student happier. When people smile they genuinely feel happiness, so when students smile to the computer that they understand the lesson, they become happier. Paragraph nine of the article states, "According to the Facial Feedback Theory of Emotion, moving your facial muscles not only expresses emotions, but also may even help produce them." The computer will give the student their own personal needs in learning and when that makes the student smile, they will feel the true emotion of happiness. Like the article states in paragraph nine, "'Putting on a happy face' actually works!"
Students will benefit greatly if the Facial Coding System is installed in schools. It will make the internet a better place to research, address each student with their own learning needs, and make students happier learners. New technology is expanding and the future is waiting for us. If we want to help the education of students and their ability to feel emotions and not become robots in the future, we must put the Facial Coding Sytem in schools. | 23
|
373fb48 | How do you see life with driverless cars? Safe or unsafe? In my opinion I chose unsafe. I am against driverless cars for these reasons. In paragraph 9, lawmakers even say that safety is best achieved with alert drivers, In some states it is even already illegal just to test drive computer driven cars, and last whos really at fault in an accident? How do we judge whos at fault if no ones really driving and could people use these cars as an exuse to drink and drive sinse there not really driving? There are many questions and reasons I have against driveless cars.
In paragraph 9 of the article, "Driveless Cars Are Coming," it states, "lawmakers know that safety is best achieved with alert drivers." We as Americans should trust in the people who propose all of our laws especially to keep us safe. Why wouldnt you trust someone who sets the boundaries of your life? if they say regular cars will be safer shouldnt we all strive to keep our country and the people in it and surrounding us safe?
In some states it is already illegal to even just test drive computer driven cars. If it is illegal to test drive them, that just shows how dangerous they really must be. Also if they are illegal in some states would they have to continue to drive regular cars while the other staes drove driveless cars? I think that would be more dangerous to mix the two types of cars on the roads. I could see even more accidents happening because of that.
Last, this is probally something about everyone could agree with, whos fault would accidents be? Police and other people would have to put in alot more effort into deciding whos fault the accident would be and sometimes they probally could be more likely to be false. If no ones driving the car then that means the manufacturers could always be at fault. Could you really rely your life on a car? I dont think I could. And even if you chose to not drive a driveless car, some people might still be in fear because they will still be driving on the same roads as them.
These our my reasons for being against driveless cars. Some people will disagree but i strongly do believe the roads will be safer as we continue to drive with regular self driven vehicles. Again with lawmakers knowing that safety is best achieved with alert drivers, in some states it is already illegal to even test drive them, and who's fault it would be in the accident, we will all be safer with self driven cars. | 34
|
906472f | Dear Senator,
Keeping the electoral college would be a disater just waiting to happen. It is old, out-dated and irrational. Are we really going to keep using the same, old method that our founding fathers used hundreds of years ago? The method itself is unfair to many American voters. It is also unjust to the canidates who won the popularity vote, but not the electoral vote.
The canidates running for presidency usually focus on the bigger states with more electoral votes or "swing" states. This makes the voters in smaller states such as Rhode Island and South Carolina feel like their opinions and voices do not matter, that the president will not care for their interests. Having the electoral college gone, means that the winner-take-all system will also be gone, and will insure voters that the canidates will spend more time in their states trying to win their votes as an individual and not as a whole.
In the 2000 U.S. presidential race, Al Gone recieved more individual votes than George W. Bush, but lost the presidency, because he did not recieve the majority of the electoral votes. This is unfair to the canidate, knowing that you won majority of the populations votes, but lost the presidency. In an article called " The Indefensible Electoral College: Why even the best-laid defenses are wrong" Mother Jones stated that after the 2000 presidential race, a poll was taken, over sixty percent of voters would prefer a more direct election than the one we have now.
In another article "In Defense of the Electoral College:Five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the President", they argue as to why we should keep the electoral college. The author of the article, Richard A. Posner, said that there is a certainity of outcome, that the winning canidate's share of the Electoral College invariably exceeds his share of the popular vote. That being said, it shows that the voters' vote do not really matter, because it all comes down to the electoral votes.
Despite the numerous amount of people who disagree with the Electoral College and all the agruements against it, we still keep it. Why? What is so bad about getting rid of the Electoral College? It gives a sense to the voters, that they matter and what they say can determine the fate of who is president. | 34
|
abdde55 | Today there are programs like NASA that are always looking for ways to explore our planets next to us. We have already sent probes and rockets to mars for exploration, but in over 30 years we havent sent one space craft to Venus, despite it being called "Earth's twin" Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of size and density, but it is the one of the most inhospitable planets that humans can step on. In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author supports his idea well by explaining the benefits of exploreing Venus despite it being so cruel for humans to walk on.
In pargraph three the author quotes that, "almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus, surface temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater then what we experence on Earth." The author first explains the inhospitably of Venus to then explain that when we adapt to the conditions there are plenty of benefits and knowledge to gain from the planet. In pargraph four the author quotes that "Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." The author explains us the value of exploreing Venus to include the fact that there could be life forms we have never saw before that have lived only on Venus. Comeing back to how the author supports his idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it offers.
In pargraph five the author explains ideas NASA has that could eventually take us and machines to Venus. he quotes that, "a vehicle hovering over Venus would advoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way."
The author adds the quote in beacuse he wants to reinforce the idea that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it offers. But he also looks at the downsides to hovering 30 miles above the landscape, citeing that from souch a high distance light cannot penetrate the dense atomsphere and that researchers can't take samples of rock, gas, or anthing else, from a distance. The author supports his evidence by looking at bolth sides of the problem and offering possible solutions to them.
He contunes in pargraph seven citeing other NASA approaches to haveing machines last longer on the surface of Venus. That if by useing mechanical computers and simplifyed electronics made of silicon carbide they can withstand the heat alot longer. In comparson to todays modern electronics which don't use gears and levers that can be built to withstand heat. The author cites this beacuse he wants the reader to know NASA is thinking of possible ideas of sending a durable machine to Venus, to withstand the chaos of the surface and send data back to people on Earth.
In "The Challenge of Exploreing Venus," the author supports his idea well that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. He first explains what the dangers are like. Then explains all the benefits of exploreing Venus. Lastly he explains ideas on how to overcome the challenges to send people and machines to gather data about Venus. In conclusion the author wants the reader to know the benefits of exploreing Venus are greater than the challenges and dangers on the surface of Venus. | 45
|
5dfdf3a | Venus is often referred to as Earth's twin planet because of the many similarities between both planets. Although, Venus may be a great planet for humans to live in there are many limitations when it comes to the planets surface. Venus has been known to be a suitable planet for humans because its size and density are alike to those of Earth. Along with being the closest to Earth in distance Venus has also been very difficult to study. None the less Venus should continue to be studied in order to find more comparisons between both Earth and Venus.
As the author explains, Earth and Venus have many similarities that would have allowed for Venus to be hospitable. It is stated that " long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life just like Earth." (paragraph 4) This section from the passage explains how Venus could have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Not only did Venus have oceans but it now has various surfaces that are alike to those on Earth. Venus has valleys, mountains, and craters that are easily compared to those on Earth. Demostrating how these planets can be compared helps the author support his claim by giving detail as to why NASA should continue studying Venus. Since both planets show many comparisons Venus could be considered our planetary visit however, not only are there various similarities but there are also numerous limitations as to why the planet Venus is inhabitable.
Although, both planets can sustain life there are various differences that demostrate why the planet Venus is incapable of doing so. As the author states in paragraph 3 there is a "thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus." making it very difficult for any light to enter the planet. Not only will the planet be dark it will also have high temperatures reachign 800 degrees Fahrenheit. It is also stated that " Beyond high pressure and heat, Venusian geology and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes,powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface." Many of these limitaions described by the author are similar to those we have on Earth however, they are "more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth." (paragraph 3)
In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus "
it is stated that although Venus has many dangerous aspects astronomers are still debating on future visits to its surface. Astronomers are doing all possible research to find a way to get to Venus and study it because, "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited bby dangers and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imaginations and innovation." (paragraph 8)
In general further studies on Venus could allow NASA to gather more knowledge and explore more planets that could be similar to Earth.
Overall, the author does a good job supporting his idea on why NASA should continue to study Venus despite the dangers it presents. The author fully explains the reasons why we should continue the studies by explaining the countless similarities both Earth and Venus contain. Not only does he explaint he reason why we should continue but he also describes the dangers that could be encountered while attempting to study
the planet. In the end the author states numerous solutions that could be used to hava a safe and scientifically productive misison. | 34
|
1cf90a1 | Using Facial Action Coding System will make changes around the world. Predicting what anothers person emotion towards you or somene else is very important to communicate, otherwise there will be confusion.
Setting up this new system of facial recongnition would be a huge step through technology as we know it. This sysem alllows computers or other devies to be more safisticated and secure for their user or owner. Why just use your face as the password when you can use any emmotion your feeling. It wont just aids adults it will also aid underage teens or elementary kids. As for an example in the text it of Making Mona Lisa Smile that "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored ,"Dr.Huang predicts."Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor."The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive-for video games or video sugery." Most human communication is nonverbal,including emotional communication."notes Dr.Huang."SO computers need to undersant that too. This is saying that kids and gaming companies will also benefit for them. In the Facial Action Coding System it predicts emotion and a big one is hate and to second we have lies. In the text Making Mona Lisa Smile. " it states that " In a false smile , the mouth is stretched sideways using the zygomatic major and a difrrent muscle, the risouris.To an expert,faces dont lie;thses muscles clues are sometimes used to spot when a smiling pollitcian or celebrity isnt being truthful." All this shows is how corrupted the govermnet really is.
In conclusion, Using the Facial Action Coding System it is the for most advanced piece of technology that will secure and protect your money, idntity and most importanly , life. | 12
|
7b132ff | Driverless Cars is a great idea, these cars would make a huge change in the world because these cars would be really helpful, but there are some adventages and disavenges of the use of these cars, one adventages is that can drive by themselves, but a desaventage is that if the sensors don't work what would happen?.
Driverless cars would be really helpful for people and mostly for people that travel a lot they fall sleep, these cars would help them by taking control and so no one get hurt. Driverless cars have sensors that help to create a 3-D model of the car's surroundings so this would help the car to see if there is any danger and if the is the car will notify the driver to take over and take another options. Cars like these ones are a great idea, it will allow the drivers to take a rest when they are tired.
Cars like driverless cars are not perfect and they are not 100 percent safe, these cars can be really expensive too and not everyone would buy them. About safety the sensors that these cars use what if they don't work? what would it happen? if the sensors don't work the cars will not alert the driver if there is any danger and this will end up in an accident and would not be good for the manufacturer and the owner, these were some reasons why the manufacturers want to put cameras in the cars so the car can see the driver and know whether the driver can drive or cannot drive.
Some manufacturers like GM they have developed driver's seats that vibrate when the vehicle is in danger. Other car that tells the driver when they should take over the car is the Google car. Cameras in cars can help a lot because while the driver is watching the road the car is watching the driver. Some manufacturers are considering bringing entertainment for these cars and information system that use heads-up displays. Such displays can be turned off when the driver needs to take over. This new tegnology in cars is really good, but how much these will cost? No one knows yet. I strongly agree with the develop of the driverless cars because this will really help peole and will help to reduce the cars accidents.
Driverless cars are defenitly are great this new tegnology will allow the driver to take a rest and then take over any time. The sensors that the cars have help to avoid any danger. Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have these new cars drive themselves by 2020, the cars they try to make will be the best option to have less cars accidents in the future. | 34
|
0a31cd0 | The UNNRRA (the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration) hires Seagoing Cowboys to take care of animals that are being shipped overseas. When you are a Seagoing Cowboy you have to take care of all the animals every day. In the text it states that the animals have to be fed and watered about two or three times a day.
When you are a Seagoing Cowboy it opens your range of knowledge about the world, so you can learn so much about people's culteres and style, but if you don't like learning about the world there is a lot of time to socialize with your freinds or make new freinds. Luke Bomberger the longest person to be a Seagoing Cowboy at that time states "The cattle-boat trips were an unbeliveable opportuninty for a small-town boy."
Though being a Seagoing Cowboy can be fun there still are struggles you have to get pass. Luke Bomberger on night watch went to go down to the captin about the hourly report (if you are the night watchman
you have to do a hourly report on the animals) and while he was going he sliped on a slipery ladder an went feet first to an edge of the ship where he could fall off into the dark icy alantic ocean, but luckily a strip of metal along the edge stoped his slide, but he broke his ribs and couldn't work for a few days.
So a lot of people would consider trying it out because of these resons. The UNNRRA is a group of 44 nations so you would work with people around the world if anyone joined. If someone joins it might be the most thrilling part of their adventure of life. When Luke was done he said "I'm grateful for the opportunity. It made me more aware of people of other countries and their needs." | 34
|
467b271 | I am against the developement of driveless cars for various reasons. First,
these cars are not 100% driveless. Second, They can be really expensive and not affordable to many and
finally, it cannot navigate through roadwork or accident in which a driver would need to take over.
These cars are not 100% driveless in the article it said that the cars would not be able to navigate through roadwork , accidents , and etc. They also can not drive in or out of driveways or handle complicated driving issues. These things could lead to accidents in which someone could get seriously injured.
Next, these cars will probably or most likely be very very explensive in which millions/billons of people would not be able to aford. Even tho it is not a serious problem i feel like most people would like to have a driveless car of there own,but because of it being expensive it
would be very very difficult. In the article it states that the Engineers at Berkeley tride to something similary as said in the pasage, "these smart-road systems worked surprisingly well, but they required massive upgrades to extisting roads, something that was simply too expensive to be practical" .In the passage it also said that radar was a device on the hilltop that cost 200 million dollars
Fianlly, it wouldnt be safe. Lets say a driver was taking his driveless car to work in the morning and his lack of sleep from last night got to him in the car and he ended up falling asleep. In the passage it said that google cars werent truly driveless, that the driver would need to take over during complicated things a driveless car wasnt able to do things
like move through accidents or roadwork and if someone got lack of sleep like they guy from above then the car would get into an accident because the person would
be sleeping and this accident could lead to his death. The passage also said that in 2013 Bmw announced trafic jam assistance" and that the car would handle speeds up to only 25 mph that speed is no where near how much people could now a days 25 mph is like for a small neightbor that raffic jam wouldnt be able to work during a regular street in which speeds could reach 55 etc.
Although the develepmonts of these driveless cars are increasing i still believ that it is not at its greatest length and i dont feel like we will reach one day when im alive mabye wehn im dead. As you can see i am against the developement of cars. | 23
|
46dc7f2 | I think that luke did the right thing by saying yes to one in a lifetime opportunity. People could have participated in the Seagoing Coyboy program but then again they didn't have to like luke he couldnt say know because it was on in a lifetime opportunity. In Lukes point of view to convise others to come would be it would be a lot of fun you would have a lot of fun you get to be with many people you can talk to people and you can even make new friends. The things that you can probably do there is make new friends talk to people have fun and be thankful you got . You can even bring your familey members with you or you can go a lone it is up to you but come and enjoy your self be happy make new friends and just be your self. You can always try something new rather you like it or you dont like it is is really up to you .You can come and everything but you have to obay the rules and do what you are told and listen. You can also be gratful that you got invitd to come and that luke wanted you to come you should br graeful rather you are or not that you got to go. This is what i think Lukes point of view for convincing people to come. | 12
|
a468a26 | Venus was just like Earth before so why haven't scientists gone and explored it yet you ask? There's a lot of reasons like if it's dangerous and if we have the technlogy to do so but that doesn't matter to the author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus " , even though there might be potential risks he still thinks we shall go and explore it.
The author has some great points actually on why we should go to Venus even though it may be dangerous. He has a lot of information from NASA to his own opinions on why we should send people to explore Venus. Like in paragraph 5 he explains an idea that NASA haves about sending people to Venus on a blimp like vehicle. There is a lot of pros and cons to that idea but he did explain well how it would work but then again he explains how it wouldn't work because they'll be to high up hovering they wouldn't be able to take pictures nor take samples of rocks,gas , or anything which quicly dumped that idea to the trash. The author quickly jumps to more information that NASA has released telling us that they are working on better innovations that would allow machines to last long enough in Venus. That could possibly work since NASA has had people go to the moon already if they work hard they would be able to create a machine that is able to go to Venus. He also explains how Venus is too hot to take phones and cameras and liquify metals but NASA is also working on a way to take mechanical computers, he explains a a lot in paragraph and has very good ideas and point on why we should go which makes me thing we should but we still need even more advancements. I know that soon NASA will have a machine that can go to Venus because we have already has people on the moon and had a machine that sadly died this year(2019) on mars, Venus is next and we will make it to Venus one day, maybe not scientist first but at least a machine that will be able to gather samples to Earth that we will study so one day humas can go to Venus and I believe this because the author explained very well how and why we should go.
The author supported his idea very well in the article even made me change my perspective, he had a lot of meaningful info well a lot of info in general that was useful that supported the fact we should go to Venus one day when we have the right technology. | 23
|
5a8d9b6 | I feel that this system would not be the right way to tell about someones emotions,jsut becuse you have a system that tells you this person is feeling his way doesnt mean they are actually feeling that way. Everyone has their own way of expressing either they way they feel or they way thefeel about something or someone. In the passage of paragraph 4 it says "his new computor software stories similar anatomical information as electronic code. Perhaps Dr. Huangs emotion algorithms are a different sort of ' Da Vinci code"! how can someone tell you how you actually feel about something jsut because it was made by a doctor that thinks he can make something up and tell you how your feeling. i wouldnt have a computor tell me how im feeling today or the next day. everyone has their own way of express how they feel. you shoudnt have someone telling you that oh your feeling this way today or your gonna feel this way the next day because everyone can feel different everyday. i woudnt use this system is it was me so i think this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is not valuable. i wouldnt recommend anyone to use this system | 12
|
39d96a1 | State Senate
In my favor i do not think that the Electoral College should still be a process. Most people in america are not so pleased with how the Electoral College works. Manily because the Electoral College, in a way, get to pick if they want this person as the president or if they want this other person as the president. The people of America do not really have their own choice. Now, if we would go from having the Electoral College and change to have election by popular vote for the president of the United States. The people in America would be much happier. I think that the Electoral College is not fair to American's. We all need to be able to select as who we want as the president of the United States.
"The Electoral College consists of 538 electors. A majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the president." Found in " What Is The Electoral College?" by the office of the Federal Register. As you see there are 538 elector. All 538 electors have to conversate about who should be the president. The Ellectoral College has complet control over that. People could want this person, but then here comesnthe Electoral College. The Ellectoral College can change who the people vote for. All of them have to deside what should be the outcome. Its never really the people choice. Its the Electoral College's choice. Americans should be able to chose in which President they want for America.
Some people want the Electoral College because they think that they solve all the problems, then there are the people who know their rights and want to be able to have full popularity vote of who their presedent is. Most of the time te popularity vote is changed by the Electoral College, They chose what they think is so called "right". The Electoral College has a mind of its own. People dont have their rights with the Electoral College. Thisprocess is not the way things should be. American's need to have or at least know their rights. That is why people in America are not so happy with what the Ellectoral College picks. The total vote for one person chould be 46% and a total vote for another person could be 42%. Ellectoral College has controle over that again. If the electors chose the person with the 42% they can bump up the percentage to be higher than the other one. That is not fair to the people of America. We do not need the Electoral College. The people of America should have full popularity vote of who the peresident of the United States should be. | 23
|
59860b0 | Venus is our closest planet to us besides Mars (sometimes) but does that mean that we should start to think about the possiblities of us landing there? The author of the article "The Challenges of Exploring Venus" is suggesting that we should go forward and try to study and hopefully go to Venus despite the dangers that are capable of happening. Venus may be our "twin planet", but it is very different from Earth. I think the author of this article supports this idea very much.
There are a couple reasons on why I think the author supports this article. One is because he talks about how Venus could have been. Venus is the most Earth-like planet that we know in our solar system but they don't exactly know if it once was like us or not. Astronomers think that Venus was once covered with oceans and it could even have supported forms of life. The author also talks about the features of Venus today. The author points out that the plant has some siliar features as us like valleys, mountains, and craters. The author ends the paragraph ,where he talks about this, with this sentence, "The value of returning to Venus seems indisputable, but what are the options for making a mission both safe and scientifically productive." This makes me think that the author is trying to get us informed about the options that it could take to make this Venus situation be safer.
This information we know about the planet is very different than ours. One of the details that the author points out is that it has a thick atmosphere of amost 97% carbon dioxide. Another thing he says is that the clouds are made up of sufuric acid and that the tempature is 800 degrees Fahrenheit. The author makes it clear that the conditions on Venus are very extreme and it would make a bad environment for us. With this information, the author makes it clear that NASA is still trying to find a possible solution for saftey reasons and informational reasons.
One of the ways that NASA is trying to study venus is by sending a "blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape." They would have to be in the air to fly over storms and get out of the way of the unfriendly ground conditions. In the air, the tempature would still be way too hot but they think that humans would be able to survieve that condition. The air pressure in the air will be close to the same pressure thats on the earth. At the end of the paragraph that talks about this , the author says that obviously these are not the best conditions but they are survivable for humans.
These are my claims on why and how the author is telling us that he supports the idea. He talks about the similarities and differences about the planet and Earth. He also talks about the possibilities this could happen in the future once we get more information. This is why I think that the author is supporting the idea of studying Venus even if the conditions are bad. | 34
|
98569e1 | Limiting car usage has many advantages. Such as putting a lot less pollution in the air and having your stress level go down letting you spend time with your family and friends. When we put pollution in the air it ruins our beautiful ecosystem. When driving a car you have to stress about how much gas you have or you stress about if you are going over the speed limit.
The first advantage to not having cars is we limit the amount of pollution in the air. Did you know that in Europe you cause up to twelve percent of its greenhouse gas, and in the US you cause up to fifty percent of that gas, that just goes in the air causing the air that we breath to become polluted. Some ways to prevent this is to car-pool with someone or just to walk there and not drive, you get to help the envirnment and you get your daily workout as well. Some countries have taking the role of taxing anyone who wants to use a car. Like in France, who has a tax policy that makes people choose diesel intead of regular gasoline. France has over sixty-seven percent of cars that run on diesel fuel. Paris has banned the use of cars do to the huge amount of smog they are having.
The second advantage for limiting the usage of cars is lowering your stress level and being able to spend time with family and friends. To help with this some countries have programs that provide people with bikes and other forms of transportation in order for people to get to work. When people don't drive cars and walk with their kids to drop them off at school then go to work it keeps the traffic and all the stress that comes with it down to an all time low. When summer time comes around teens can organize what they do and who they hang out with based on where they are and how far they want to walk to get there.
So limiting the usage of cars has many significant advantages like less pollution and being able to spend time with family and friends while lowering your stress level. So before you get in your car and drive to wherever you are going just take a second and think, can I walk there instead. | 34
|
e9bdad6 | I think you should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys program because it will feel great to help animals in need. From my experience of being a Seagoing Cowboys felt amazing because I was able to go to Greece and had a cargo filled with 335 horses plus hay and oats to feed them. I had to feed and water them three times a day. Even though it takes a long time to get from place to place, keeping the animals healthy made me feel happy for me and everbody who participated. That's why I think you should participate in this program.
First, If you become a Seagoing Cowboy it could be fun from time to time. When we were still on a cattle-boat trip, I was able to see Europe and China on the way. Another thing that was fun was that one time me and the crew played volleyball and baseball games where the animals had been housed. Other times we would have table-tennis, fecing, and boxing tournaments to help pass the time. So that may be a thing to enjoy while you are a Seagoing Cowboy.
Next, When you are a Seagoing Cowboy it may open up the world to you like it did to me. From my experience, it made me more aware of people and their needs. So after the long adventure, I had lead my family to host a number of international students and echange visitors for many years. This program had mad me become a better person so, I can help people and their needs. I hope you will do the same too.
Then, when you are a Seagoing Cowboy sometimes it can be intersting but, other times it can be painful. One time when I was being a watchman, I had to watch the animals every hour to make sure they didn't wake up. When I went to make my hourly report to the captain, I had slipped on my backside when I went down a slippery ladder. That day I was lucky to be alive because a small strip of metal stopped me from going into the dark Altantic but I couldn't work due to my cracked ribs. I hope when you become a Seagoing Cowboy, you would not make the same mistake that I did.
Finally, from this huge experience of my life, I had enjoyed it for the most part. From the beginning, I started out as a a simple man then become a Seagoing Cowboy. This is why I highly encouraged you to become a Seaboy Cowboy becuase of all the experiences and fun you can have if you join. Sometimes you can have good times and sometimes you can have bad times, but the impotant part is that you are helping out every country in need. Also you are making a difference in the world and in your personality. | 23
|
192c7f5 | The new technology called Facial Action Coding System enables computures to identify human emotions. The process begins when the computer contructs a 3-D computer model of the face. The fourty-four muscles in the model must move like human muscels. Dr. Paul Eckman creator for FACS calculated the emotions of Mona Lisa. I do not believe that FACS is important for the students to learn about.
This technology is not important to what is going on to in the class room or in todays world. The students in highschool have other things they have to be getting ready for like graduation. There are standards into graduating on time or even early and I am sure learning how to caluclate emotions from a computer and pictures is not one of them. The technology is in the path of achievment if the activity is in a progam by its self and not in the high school or middle school. Some students are pushing the edge to gradutate as it is. This will be something they will want to do and they cant if they are behind in their classes. These students already have way more technology on their hands now adays than they should. The technology is upgrading each day. FACS is not something that would help someones career with in the futrue. School's should be about helping kids get ready for the future. They should not make everything the students be on the computers. Some people want to contain the knowledgement about the expresstions on other peoles faces than gradution than they should take a class about FACS out side of school. The kid in elementry are not going to know what paper and pencil's even are if we keep coming up this technologys like this that we dont really need. I would not want a computer telling people, or evem myself, what mood i am in. I know what mood I am in. I would not want my parents to know if I was mad because I would be mad at them and not want them to know. If people wanted you to know their feelings they will most likely tell you how they feel. The Facial Action Coding System is the waste of a schools money. The money that is put into the FACS is way more than a school could possibly They could use the money to fix something around the school. The FACS is just way out of hand.
The new technology called Facial Action Coding System enables computures to identify human emotions. The process begins when the computer contructs a 3-D computer model of the face. The fourty-four muscles in the model must move like human muscels. Dr. Paul Eckman creator for FACS calculated the emotions of Mona Lisa. I do not believe that FACS is important for the students to learn about. Students should focus on getting a diploma, rather than knowing someones emotions through a computer and picture. | 23
|
8bf170a | The author studys Venus is a worthy pursuit despite dangers becuse there are many things out there that could be discoverd worth thr dangers.
In paragraph 8, it says "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only becuse of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also becuse human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally could be explored and lead up to much bigger things. If we dont take the chance and explore we could be passing up many great discoverys, such as a new plant that couls help cure canser or even a animal that could help save the enviotment. Many people may say they dont want to risk peoples lifes or to scared of what could go wrong. This is a risk that should be takes becuase if not there is a chance we could missout on a discover that could do big things."our travels on earth and beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation" is what was stated in the story saying this is a big project we dont want nor need to miss out on.
moral of the stoy we need to get out there and discover new things. | 23
|
7094f7e | Some people believe that the "Face on Mars" is just an alien artifact. Although these people believe this, it is not true. The "face" that was discovered on the surface of Mars was really just a mesa. This was proven, when scientists used a special camera to capture what we were really seeing. The camera used showed everything that it captured. It was so clear that no matter what it had taken a picture of you'd be able to tell exactly what it was.
This was a huge attraction to everyone. This topic bacame very popular. The truth was then revealed. The huge attraction, the "Face on Mars", was just a landform. Things like this were commonly found around Cydonia, thus proving that things like this are somewhat common in this area. The picture taken showed a butte or a mesa which are said to be commonly found in the American West. It was even compared to the Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho, a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa. In conclusion the disception of the "Face on Mars" was all just a misunderstanding. The truth was unfolded an now the world knows what the "Face on Mars" really was; a mesa. | 12
|
03448b6 | It is a good idea to explore and is worthy pursuit to explore the planet Venus, despite the dangers it presents. If NASA decides to explore Venus, then there could be many benifits from it.
One reason why it´s a good to explore the Planet Venus is because of data. If we explore Venus, despite the dangers, then it could bring us information about the planet. Then possibly, with that information it could bring innovation based on what NASA discovered.
The second reason why it´s a good reason to explore Venus it because of the future. If NASA finds a way to explore Venus (because of the extremely harsh weather condition) then we could possibly explore other planets in the soloar system without being worried of other weather relate obstacles. According to the acticle on paragraph 7, it says that NASA made some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide that has lasted on Venus´s conditions for 3 weeks.
Even though exploring Venus will take a long time, it will worth waiting. If NASA explores Venus and goes succesfully, then it could cause a scientific break through, leading science into a new world of innovation, new technology, and a more sophisicated world. All-in-all, exploring Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it represent. | 23
|
d2ef605 | The face. People think it was created by aliens, some others belive it's just a natural landform, but it is in fact a natural landform. Although it does look like a face, that aliens created, it is a landform created by a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa, with shadows that make it look like it has facial features.
A Martian mesa. That's all the face is. It was created by a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated messa, with shadows that give it the illusion of eyes, nose, and a mouth. Martian mesas, are common enough around Cydonia, which is another reason why this could'nt have been created by aliens. Lastly, this couldn't have been aliens, because there is not enough scientific proof to even know if there is even any form of life on mars. The face is just a huge rock formation, with shadows that give you the illusion of facial features.
Even though most people believe that it is a natural landform, some do believe it was aliens who created it. One reason is because, it is more benitfital for Nasa to keep quiet, and say it is a natural landform. Another reason is because, the face looks more like an alien face than a natural landform. Although there is more proof that it is a natural landform, that face could have been made by aliens.
All in all the face appears to be a natural landform. Some people may disagree but, there is more facts and research, that the face is a natural landform. Although there is more facts about it being a natural lansdform, some people still will think it could have been aliens who created the face. But the face is just a huge rock formation created by a Martian mesa, with shadows that give you the illusion of facial features. | 23
|
a88a91c | Dear Senate,
It's offical, The Electoral College is unfair, outdated, and irrational. The best arguments in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality. And the arguments against direct elections are spurious at best. It's really hard to say this, but Bob Dole was right: "Abolish the Electoral College."
The Electoral College is a non-democraic method of selectiong a president that will be by declaring the candidate who receives the most popular votes the winner. According the the "In Defense of the Electoral College" article," the Elecoral College method is not democraic in a modern sense.....it is the electors who elect the president not the people." So bascially we are voting for the electors and we keep our finger crossed that they vote for the president we want. It is unpractical that the people vote for the president they would like to govern their counrty and then the opposite party wins. According to a Gallup poll in 2000, taken shortly ater Al Gore, thanks to the quirks of the Electoral College, won the popular vote but lost the presidency, over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct elecion to the kind we have now. The last election was yet another close one thanks to the Electoral College, which the popular vote winner lost the presidency. After all of this the Electoral College still has its defenders...
At the most basic level, the Electoral College is unfair to voters, because of the winner-take-all system in each state. Candidates that don't spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states. During the 2000 campaign, seventeen states didn't see the candidates at all, including Rhode Island and South Carolina, and voters in 25 of the largest media markets didn't get to see a single campaign ad.(Source 2)
The Elector Voters in toss up states are more likely to pay close attention to the campaign- to really listen to the competing candidates knowing that they are going to decide the election. But other types of voters just like the "play around" according to article two.
The Electoral College restores some of the weight in the political balance that large states lose by virtue of the mal-apporionment of the Senate decreed in the Constitution but is this system really the most logical one to use?(Source 3). True this system has worked for many years but it is time for a change. People are starting to think it is unfair and really poinless to even vote when the president they want will possibly not win anyway.
The single best argument against the Electoral College is what we might call the disater factor.( Source 1) The American people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century; the system allows for much worse. Consider the state legislatures are technically responsible for picking electors, and that those electors could always defy the will of the people. (Source 2) Back in 1960, segregationists in the Louisiana legislature nearly succeeded in replacing the Democratic electors who would oppose John F. Kennedy. So that popular vote would not have gone to Kennedy. (Source 3) In the same vein, "faithless electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please.
Under the Electoral College system, voters vote not for the president, but for a slate of electors, who in turn elect the president. There are some reasons for retaining the Electoral College but it still lacks democratic pediree. And the people should have the right to vote on the president they think is the best for
OUR
country. After all its,"We the people" not," We the electors".
Sincerley,
Highschool Student | 34
|