Datasets:

DysfunctionalHuman

/

essay-scoring

like 0

Some advantages on limiting car use can be actually very favorable for the enviroment as well as for the people. If the usage of car is limited there would be less pollution, less car accidents and no more "stuck in traffic". As of that it would be a healthy way of life, more excise and more time to pass with other people. One thing that could be a good way to start this "Limited Car Usage" would be what the city of Bogota, Colombia is doing: The Day Without Cars. This is promoted as a program when in that day cars are banned with only buses and taxis permited. This inspires the people to walk more, ride a bike, and if something is very, very far they could just take a bus or a taxi. This would make a great impact on people's life and maybe it would soon be joined by other cities or whole countries like the cities of Cali and Valledupar have already done. In Paris, France driving was banned due to smog, not exactly like that, but it was partially banned to clear the air of the city. For example one rule they had was that on monday motorists with even-numbered licence plates were ordered to leave their cars at home and that they next day it would be the odd-numbered plates who would have to follow this rule. Thanks to this little rule congestion was down 60 percent in France's capital and the smog was cleared off. In America is almost the End of Car Culture. There have been recent studies that suggests that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by. By this alone you can see that "We are witnessing a long-term cultural shift" as Mimi Sheller said. Now yes, this whole "No Car" or "Car Limiting" rules can have a negative implication for the car industries, but in general for the rest of the people this would be a good impact in their lives. In general "Car Limiting" can only make a positive impact in the lives of most of us and also in the enviroment. And as Bill Ford said at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelora, Spain: "Pedestrian, bicycle, private cars, commercial and public transportation traffic are woven into a connected network to save time, conserve resources, lower emissions and improve safety".  

Driverless cars are in our near futrue. Cars like these need to have protection for everybody. I like the idea of that they are trying to make them, trying to make them smater, and trying to make smater roads for us to drive them on too. Just my opion on them is that its a good idea and I would love to experince riding one. My thoughts on having driverless cars is that I would be a smart idea, but there is a few things like the whole smater roads thing how would we have smater roads is my question? I think that it would be expensive. Would there be only certin road we could us these types of cars on? The whole idea on have these types of cars amazes me but it would be kinda scary to try something like this out. Also I like the whole idea on that the car would have to have someone that is checking out for the car but it would be hard for the person to keep the concentration on the road. Another thing is that the law doesnt allow us to try things out with these cars. I mean that would be a major issue for the people testing them. I also was thinking how hard would these cars be to drive? Would we have to have some special training to drive one? I read in the passage that the car would automactily tell you when it would be time for you to start driving but what if the driver is hispanic or any other race and the car tell them its there turn to drive in english. Would there be settings for that or no? Also what is the whole point on driverless cars I think they would be able to get around in traffic, accidents , and construction sites? I think it would also be alot nicer if they could get around that stuff on there own too. Anyway these cars would be nice to have around and all. I would also love to ride in one just to experiece the feeling and listen to the way that they would transfer to the person who is siting in the drivers seat. these cars would be the bomb if they really were driverless and are easy to control. I would love to see what it all comes down to, I really do look forward to it.

Mona Lisa Smile's The new technology to read anyone facial expressions to how much would it take to identify a human emotion. They use Mona Lisa smile's to see how its calcutlies, but its show she's 83% happy, 9% disgusted, 6% fearful, and 2% angry. Identify the movements of the muscles, but a Dr. Paul Eckman classified a six basic emotions like happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and saddness. Like Dr. Huang said, " the facial expressions for each are universal observe, even though individuals often show vary degrees of expression". The emotion recognition software tracks these facial movents in real life faces or a painted of someone face. It can identify mix emotions by weighting the differents units in da Vinci painted. Actaully humans perform the same impressive everyday. probably could tell a friend feelings just noticing by their face. some of us would have trouble noticing their emotion traits like happy, sad, worried, and scared. Like a sciencist would says, " a classroom computer could recognize when a students becoming confuse or bored". Dr. Huang predicts " then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructors". In Dr. Huang notes most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication, and cumputers need to understand that too. To a experts a face don't lie about a muscle clue are sometimes use to spot a smile is not being truthful. A drama coach contantin a stanislavsky for his actor to reproduce a smile and frowning as a way of creating emotions on stage. Even showing empathy for that person to make them feel great for them selfs. Faces could reveal so many emotions even through body it can be noticable or not but we all human that show so much emotions.

Limiting car uses will change the enviorment in a dramatic way. VAUBAN , Germany - residents don't use cars, they dont even have room for cars. The only way to get a parking space is at your house which you have to buy for $40,000, along with a home or large garages at the the edge of the develpoment. Streets are completely "car-free" besides a few streets on the edge of the community. 70% doesn't even own cars. Heidrun Wlater, former car owner says "When I had a car was always tense. I'm much happier this way." They are healthier and less tense because they walk, and bicycle keeping their self fit and active. PARIS , France - banned driving due to smog. Even-numbered plates one day then the next day odd-number plates, the ones who did use there cars they got a fine of 22-euro ($31). They did that for five days. 4,000 people were fined and 27 people had their cars impounded due to there reaction to the fine. A car being droven every other day helps out with the polution. it cuts back on the polution if it's not running putting it in the enviorment. It's like if you drive once a week then you are only putting a little bit of polution in the enviorment. You aren't putting as much as you would be if you drove everyday a week. BOGOTA , Colombia - They walk, bike, hike, skate, and take buses to work during the car-free days. It's been the third year in a row that they have had this day. The goal is to reduce smog and it works. Violaters are fined $25. More cities like, Cali, and Valledupar joined the event. They are taking a stand against polution and cleaning up the smog. The bicyclers made 118 miles of bike paths. Just for this day. "This is a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," said business man Carlos Arturo Plaza. United States of America , President Obama's goal is to curb the green house gas emissions. Everyone is asking "Has America passed peak driving?" In 2013 Americans drove 9% per person below the peak which in January 1995 that's where we were. Cars per house hold has came down. There are cellphone apps now a days thet help out with car pooling. Instead of driving yourself to work ask your co-workers to switch days with you. Some days you drive them to work and other days, they drive you to work. You both would be saving on gas and putting less polutuion in the air. People from the ages 16- to 39- years-olds are just getting thier license, while older people maintain their license was the research Mr. Sivak's has found. Many people just get jobs where they can walk to work, use public transportation or car pool with friends. Walking, riding a bicycle, hiking, and skating are all ways to get somewhere without creating polution. If there is a way to cut back on polution then you should take that oppertunity. Car-pooling with a friend, or co-worker is also a way to cut back on polution. Instead of two cars coming from an area to go to the same area they should just use one car to go to that area instead of taking to cars for it. My point is save the enviorment and create less polution like Paris, Bogota, and Vauban. They created way to help out the enviorment, you take a stand and you make a change.

In the passage the author talks about how venus is really close to earth but humans haven't been there ever due to how dangerous it is. He goes on to say that it is one of the most dangerous plants out there, but they really want to know whats out there. They want to know what it is like there and if there something more out there. Due to the fact that it is so dangerous they can't send a human there to land on the ground, they have come up with an idea about sending a human out there but in a blimp. So normally when they send people into space they land there and are able to step out on the ground and be on the plant but, for venus its a different story. Due to the air and all the chemicals out there we can't land there at all so, they want to send someone out there in a blinp to hover over venus to see whats out there. Venus is one of the most questionable plants due to the fact we have no clue what could be there. NASA is still working on other approaches to study venus. It might take a few years before someone comes up with a way to view venus without having to land on it. These people are willing to do everything it takes to find a way to view venus and find out whats out there. At the end of the passage the author say "Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by damgers and doubts but should be expaned to meet the vary edges of imagination and innovation." and i agree we should know whats out there and be able to explore the world to its full life,becasue we never know what might happen next.

A spacecraft was circling around Mars. It was snapping photos of the planet when something was spotted. It looked like a human face. The only thing though it wasn't a face, it was a natural land formation. It is a priority for NASA to tell everyone that its just a landform. The formation only looks like a face because the rock formation resembles the shape of a head. Shadows form the illusion of the eyes, nose, and mouth. On April 5, 1998 Mars global surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time. Michael malin and his mars orbitercamera team snapped a pictuire. The team snapped a picture ten times larger than the original Viking photos, as said in paragraph seven of " Unmasking the Face on Mars". Thousands of anxious "fans" were waiting when they saw the image. It revealed a natural landform. There is no alien monument after all. You see the "face" is just a big rock. Even though everyone is not satisfied and say that the experts are just hiding it from them, NASA is right. Why would we hide it from you? Everyone has the right to know about it. Plus that would be a lot to handle. I'm positive that we are telling you everything we know. In conclusion we have told you everything. We have taken more pictures than anyone could ask for. The pictures prove that its just a rock formation. Some one even said, " It reminds me of Middle Butte in the Snake River of Idaho. That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the face on Mars." See it reminds some one of a landformation because it is.

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?

The Electoral College Dear Mr. Nixon I think as a citizen of Flordia that the Electoral College should not be apart of our states voting rights because the people voteing do not have a direct vote to the president. Our state just like many others have a "Winner-takes-all system that awards all electors to the winning presidential candidate." Every election is a unfair election because the people dont get to directly vote for the president. "What have Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the AFL-CIO all, in their time, agreed on? Answer: Abolishing the electoral college!" This is proof that not only basic people of the USA think the electoral college should not exit but people who have been important to this country and other commities. When voting through the electoral college voters dont vote for the president they vote for a slate of eloctors who then elect the president. Which is not right to the people who do vote an the people running for president, plus its wrong to the country because everyone has the right as a US citizen to elect a president but there not actually voting for the president. "At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair to voters. Because of the winner-takes-all system in each state, candidates dont spend time in states they know they have no chance of winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states." This is again more proof that the elecooral college is unfair to all the U.S voters. "Its official: The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational. The best argument in favor of it are mostly assertions without much basis in reality. And the arguments against direct elections are spurious at best. Its hard to say this, but Bob Dole was right: Abolish the electoral college." The electoral college is something that should be taken out of the electing process because it dosent give us as U.S citizens our exact rights to vote for president because its the electors who elect the president not the people.  

The use of Driverless cars is a new and upcominh innovation. The real question though is, are they safe? The world will never now completely because there are a numerous ammount of problems that can occur. Also do they cars place to big of an economic role in the world? The use of driverless cars are unsafe and too exspensive for society. The first reason of many is, whose fault is it if the car crashes? This is a debate that society will never truly know because there are too many reasons for both sides, The car could be faulty and crash and harm people, or the car will crash because the human operating this car wasn't paying attention at the right moment. The debate is endless and society will have to discover how to judge the situation. In the article it states: "As a result, in most states it is even illegal to test computer-driven cars. California, Nevada, Florida, and the DIstrict of Columbia have led the country in allowing liminted use of semi-autonomous cars" (Driverless Cars Are Coming). This quote states that many states are creating laws about this topic because of the chances of accidents. If driverless cars are being prevented on roads in some states, then why should we take the chance in any other state? The second reason is that they are just too exspensive. The cars will need to have special sensors to make them a hundred percent safe. This will be too costly and will take a toll in economic debt. The sensors will need to be placed in every road and this will be way too costly. The article sates this about sensors in roads: "These smart-road systems worked suprisingly well, but they required massive upgrades to existing roads, something that was simply too exspensive to be practical" (Driverless Cars Are Coming). This statement makes a lot of sense especially since the debt is burrying our economy today. Also the other option is to have smart cars with 3D mapping sensors, but these cars will be too costly for many of the Americans today so there will still be accidents occuring. So the real answer to this is that driverless cars are too exspensive. The third and final reason is will the drivers pay attention still? The cars may be driverless in many situations but the human driver is still needed in certain situations and these situations can be very dangerous. The article states that "In fact, none of the cars developed so far are completely driverless. They can steer, accelerate, and brake themselves, but all are designed to notify the driver when the road ahead requires human skills" (Driverless Cars Are Coming). The impact can be very harmful and dangerous especially if the operater of a car doesn't pay attention when needed. If a driver dozes off because they think they won't need to pay attention then they could possibly run through construction, go around accidents or if the car malfunctions. The drivers will misuse their privliges with these cars and they will not be safe in our society. The use of driverless cars are unsafe and too exspensive for society. The reasons kisted above state just some of the many reasons why driverless cars would be useless in todays world. The cars are not proved safe yet and they will be too heavily priced for everyone to get one. The use of these cars are useless until they are proven completely safe and they are cost efficient. The real question though is, would you want your parents, kids, or even friends to drive these cars if you knew they are not proven to be 100% malfunction free?

I think having this technology would be a great idea for school. When a teacher is showing a other student how to do math or something else ,but there is a other student also asking for help. It will make the computer notice the face expression and it will try to help the student figure out the math problem. That type of technology used in schools is helpful.Lets say it was used in all the computers in the world. It will be violating private privacy.The technology would not be accepted by certain amount of people who need private privacy they would put a sticky note on their camera.One to support my claim on how it would help schools is "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored","Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." That is why I think having this could help have better grades and may like the subject more.One other benefit for this is if they put these type of computers in a office.To see if your employee is having a bad day at work. Trying to help him with their bad day to make sure they are happy when they are working. Making the working background a better place.They should also use this with lie detectors to show if he is actually lieing or just breating hard on purpose to lie. They would also try not to lie. This tecnology would be a grest resource. I have evidence to show if they In conclusion lieing. "The process begins when the computer constructs a 3-D model of the face; all 44 major muscles in the model must move like human muscles. " Movement of one or more muscles is called an action unit". in conclusion having this could improve most of our daily lives ,like in school,work,or in courts when trying to see they are truthful. Having this in classrooms would be super valuable for student who are confused in subjects.

Technology is rapidly advancing with each passing moment. Newer andfastertechnology is being used everyday making the world a better place. The world has also started implementing technology into the schools kids learn in today. The use of technology creates new ways of learning that can benefit students and make them better and brighter contributers to society. The FAC or Facial Action Coding System can read emotions and put them into data. It has six basic emotions: happiness, surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. The FAC does this by making a computer 3D model and makes all 44 major muscles in the face and makes them function. By doing this, teachers could read students faces telling what kind of emotional state they're in. By cataloging each student with their current emotion, we can find out wht makes them hesitant to certian problems and what we can do to fix it. Since emotion is a key part to human communication, the FAC is very benefical to the classroom. The face generates all emotions into a language that most people can read. The new technology can show the depth of emotion over great distances. This can proove benefical to students who take online classes via computer. The teacher/professor can not only communicate with students but can now distinguish areas of study that might frighten people sothat lesson plans may be adjusted. The technology could read how happy someone is who received a good test score or personal goal that a student has reached. The FAC tells us emotions but what can we do to change people's current emotion. Studies show that when you make a face, you feel that emotion you're pretending to be in. The FAC could possibly "prescribe" the user an emotion to help them if they are sad. The users could then be prescribed a joke or something that will make them laugh or giggle. The happier a person is, wouldn't they be less doubtful and more confidant towards more challenging tasks. The possibilties for this technology are endless. The FAC could revolutionize the way people learn. The FAC could tell teachers where they should focus more and where they should direct their attention. The FAC can also give the teachers a way to see into the type of learner people are and how they truely feel about caertain subjects. Another good use for this technology could be to prescribe a dose of happiness to students tobrighten their spirits to help them during a test. The FACis truely benfical to students in the classroom.

Our solar system revolves around many different planets, one being Venus. There are many people who study each and every one of the planets in our atmosphere, from the distance it is from us, to the gravitational pull, to its velocity, etc. To have a better understanding of each planet, technology has helped immensly as well as going into space and seeing everything for ourselves in person. Being an explorer in space comes with both good and bad things. For example, as stated in the passage, "no spacecraft has yet to survive the landing or visit to Venus." Many people may not find this as a huge issue due to the fact we humans aren't necessarily built as spacecrafts, and of course I agree, but in my opinion that is still a risk. Another con is that Venus is the hottest planet, although Mercury is closer to the sun as the author mentioned in Paragraph 3, Venus can be deadly due to the pressure and heat it holds. As everything else in life, there can be a good outcome. I believe learning about what is surrounding us outside of Earth is very important. Not only will we be infromed, but there has been said that there was life in Venus almost as much as we have on Earth, they don't call Venus "Earth's twin" for simply no reason. I strongly believe that we're closer to a better future each and everyday that goes by, scientists, geologists, etc all try to capture some sort of new information that can possibly help our future in a good and positive matter. In conclusion, all the information the author of this passage provided me with gave me a better understanding on whether or not it's worth it to continue trying to discover more about this similar planet to Earth. From what I read, I can intake that yes it can be dangerous as I stated in the second paragraph, it can risk lives, but at the same time life is full of risks. It's important to me as well as I'm sure it is to others, to know if there can be another life somewhere completely different and that not being a state or country by any means, it's literally a different planet. Therefore, traveling outside of Earth is a huge challenge, but fear shouldn't stop us from gaining such innovation for our future.

The idea of Driverless cars in the future can be a very controversial topic. Many may say that it is too dangerous, but others argue that there are ways to ensure safety and that these cars are the future of technology. In the article "Driverless Cars Are Coming" the author presents both sides of the argument. After reading the article, I have come to conclusion that Driverless cars are a positive change in technology and can be used for the better. Google has already invented the driverless car and has been making improvements for years. The car contains sensors on the wheel, a rotating sensor on the roof, a video camera mounted on the rear view mirror, a GPS reciever, and an intertial motion sensor. All of these things are used in the car to ensure you are provided with a safe ride. Because of Google and their invention of the Driverless car, in the future this could be the public transportation system. These care would use half the fuel that taxis use today and a driverless car offers far more flexibility than a bus. Paragraph 5 states, "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" This quote is showing that all the sensors and cameras that they have inserted into the car make it safe to ride in and make it so that the car is mimicking how it would drive with a person behind the wheel. In conclusion, The google driverless car is an invention that could change the future and they way that we get places. There are both positives and negatives found while testing these cars and making improvements. Overall, with all of the sensors put in the car to ensure safety, google can make it possible to have a safe ride in the car. Once all improvements have been made to the driverless car, it will change the future of transportation.

The planet Venus is inhospitable at its current state, but is it worth it to find out the truth? Scientists tell us that Venus is averaging temperatures over 800 degrees Fahrenheit and the pressure is 90 times greater than Earth's. Venus has been unexplorable due to these factors with the last mission failing in a few hours, but is it worth the risk? The idea of pursuing Venus is dangerous, but can be worth it to find more about how the geography was similar to earth, and if Venus could ever support life again. Venus is called Earth's sister planet because it is the closest planet to Earth in density, size, and distance. Humans have tried to explore Venus many times in the past but have all failed due to the intense temperature and pressure of the planet. The planet also has a thick atmosphere of 97% carbon dioxide which makes it even more challenging to visit. Despite these factors, why do scientists want to visit this deadly planet? Scientists are very infatuated with this planet because it used to be just like earth from a geography standpoint. The planet was covered with large oceans, rocky sediment, valleys, mountains, and craters. These are more than enough reasons for scientists to explore Venus because they want to learn more about what occured for the planet to transform from the earth like place. Scientists need to learn more about Venus so they can learn more about our planet too. They are working on ways to observe the planet while being able to come back alive. NASA has developed an interesting idea to send humans to study venus. They want to study Venus by hovering above the planet just like planes fly over storms. This idea would keep humans away from the harmful things Venus has to offer, but there are some down sides to this idea. Observing Venus from above can only do so much for us. Light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere, so insight into the ground life of Venus is limited. The biggest down side is the fact that researchers cannot take samples of Venus such as rock and grass back to earth to study. This idea is still better than nothing because anything we learn from this mission is something we did not know before. The age old question that most people have on planets is "could they ever inhabit life again?" Scientists have studied planets for many years and have seen a variety of things. They have concluded that Mars will be able to inhabit life and have started a program where sign ups are available to leave Earth to help scientists conduct an experiment for life. Venus once held many characteristics similar to earth, but the most important one is that many years ago Venus could have supported a variety of life. The question is what changed? Venus has very hot temperatures and high pressures so it is difficult for scientists to get up close and take samples to study. Scientists are working on different ways to study Venus where they can get closer to take samples. NASA has used some simple electronics made of silicon carbide and simulated it in the chaotic conditions of Venus and it survived for three weeks. This is important because they can use these electronics to send them into the atmosphere of Venus and take pictures and samples from the planet until they find an alternate solution to getting humans past that thick carbon dioxide atmosphere. Scientists also thought of reverting back to mechanical computers to go into the atmosphere. This could work because things that use mechanical parts tend to do better in conditions of high pressure, heat, and other limiting factors. These things could be worth it to the people of Earth because if we determine a way to put life on Venus, the whole world would change. The idea of Venus' geography being very similar to Earth's and the fact that it could have supported life makes it worth it to study venus despite the dangers that come with it. Venus used to have oceans. mountains, and valleys just like earth, but have no idea what happened to all of those things which make them want to study the planet even more. Life could have been supported long ago and scientists are working to discover a way around the limiting factors to figure out if it could ever be supported again. Scientists are doing everything they possibly can to study Venus and it is only a matter of time before we have the answers we seek.

Have you ever wanted to experience a life changing event? Well, now you can. In fact, by joining the Seagoing cowboys program you can do that and much more including: helping others, seeing and experiencing new things, and having fun along the way. Since World War II Europe has been in ruins and many people are searching for help to recover. I alone can't do it all. So, this is why I am asking you to help with the job. With your help you can recover many countries' food supplies, animals and more. In fact, you may have the oppertunity to care for as much as or more than 300 some animals along the way. It helped make me more aware of peoples' and countries' needs and I am sure it will you too. Not to mention all of the incredible sights you will see. We will have plenty of time to see and visit many wonderful sights and places along the way. For example, the first time I went, we took about two weeks to crosss the Atlantic and about a month to get to China. Therefore we had a plentiful amount of time to relax and enjoy the sights and seans. You may also visit places during this time including Italy, Crete, and the Panama Canal. In these places you can take tours, ride in gondolas, and much more. Please don't forget the time included for fun. Fun is added in many activities during the trip. One example of this is on the boat after returning from unloading animals. During this time we can play baseball, volleyball, and table tennis. We can also fence, box, read, whittle, and play many other games. Of corse by the time to leave you will always have a part left with you from your voyage, the memories. Because of the Seagoing Cowboy's program also known as the UNRRA I am open to the world around me. Helping others, seeing and experienceing new things, and faving fun along the way has contributed in me experiencing a life changing event and I want you to experience this fantastic journey with me. So what do you say? Are you ready to experience it too?

Could you imagine sitting behind a wheel of a driveless car? The thought may sound good, but in reality it's worse. Automakers should prevent making driveless cars. Driveless cars are dangerous, and a waste of money. Driveless cars are dangerous. In the state of Indiana about five out of ten smart cars are bought each day. About one out of three cars are wrecked each day. The features of normal cars are already distracting. Let alone make a driveless car. In paragraph eight, it states "wouldn't drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?" If a driver got bored waiting on their turn they could easily fall asleep. What if they fell into a deep sleep? That would be even more dangerous. Also, easier for a wreck to occur. The driver could easily get distracted by their phone or anything. All of these situations are dangerous. Nobody should take the risk of hurting someone or themselves. Driveless cars are a waste of money. In paragraph ten, it stated "Mercedes-Benz, Audi, and Nissan plan to have cars that can drive themselves by 2020." Here in Indiana, a Mercedes-Benz run about $80,000. Imagine spending that much on just one car. You can buy two for just that one price. People will spend that amount on a new car, but not college. Around the world, two out of three students miss out on college. Imagine your mother spending that much on a new driveless car instead of college for you. Wouldn't that hurt your feelings? Driveless cars are dangerous, and a waste of money. Automakers should prevent making driveless cars. You can save about ten lives a day by preventing driveless cars. May we all strive to help save a life. I wouldn't waste my money on a driveless car, and neither should you.

I believe that the electoral college is an outdated system of voting, and that we should get rid of it. If we removed the electoral college, votes could be counted much quicker, and more accurately. Our system now is outdated, and needs to be replaced with something different. The electoral college was established in a time where technology was very primitive, and votes had to be taken as a general consensus, because counting hundreds of thousands of votes would take a large amount of time and was impractical. In current time though, counting single votes is much faster and accurate than going through the process of the electoral college. A large poll could be taken that digitally stores the votes of citizens quickly and safely. The electoral college is not very accurate either. For example, as stated in source 2, Al Gore won the popular vote, but loss due to the way that the electoral college works. Many citizens feel as if their vote doesn't matter, because they aren't directly voting for a candidate, they're voting for electors that will vote for a candidate. The thought that in a democracy, that the voting system that we use to pick our "leader" is a winner-take-all ideology is absurd. If we are to keep the electoral college, we must change the way that the electoral vote system works. We must change it so that it is no longer winner-take-all, and make it so that a certain percentage of votes goes the party that the vote is for. For example, if 50% of people voted for Romney, and 50% voted for Obama, we should split the electoral votes right down the middle, so that the amount of electoral votes a candidate gets reflects their popular vote. Many presidents focus on larger states, which is understandable due to the fact that they have more votes, but if we change the way that the votes work, the candidate that focuses on many smaller states can stand a chance in the election. So as you can see, if we want our future presidents to be elected fairly, our voting system must change. Whether it is completely taking away the electoral college, or just changing the way that electoral votes are counted, there must be a change. I don't think that you want to see the candidate that you voted for to lose as Al Gore did back in 2000.      

The author is clearly for this new technology that reads and evaluates all the different mixed emotions a person has. After reading the passage I personally think it's invasive and unessiscary. This program monitors people to find out exactly what they're feeling. In one scenario it says it would help students on an online schooling course. If the computer thought they were at some point confused about what was going on in the lesson, the program would help and change it to make it easier. While this is useful to the student, I think the computer could easily be fooled by someone coniving that might have just wanted an easy pass. If that would be the case, then the program is basically useless because no one's truely learning anything. Another reason this is a bad idea is that it could make it a lot easier for hackers or identity theives to act and ruin people's lives. In paragraph six it says, "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 program goes that deep to watch you for something as simple as your ads that it's honestly terrifing. A hacker could find a way to monitor you the same way. Technology has made it so easy for people to get their identities stolen and this new technology might just make it easier. In addition to being potentially dangerous, its also virtually useless. It says in the passage, "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication, so computers need to understand that, too.” The first part of the quote is true, however, theres no reasoning for the second part. It really just leaves you hanging, it would help their case more if they gave a solid answer as to why computers need to know, otherwise it's simply an opinion. It gives examples of why its useful, but its for gaming and entertainment purposes, which is nothing that would dramatically improve human life. In addition to that, the program is invasive. People generally use the internet for research, students especially. The ads are already annoying and in the way, theres no reason for them to be custom to how the person feels. Plus not everyone wants to be put in the spotlight and exposed like that, how they feel is their personal buisness, their life and opinion on certain situations. Regardless on how anyone, myself included, feels about this new technology, its probably going to happen in the future. Our generation has only ever known technology, and if anyone at all likes it then the producer is going to give it. It's a fight between morals and greed, and I doubt the attitude of this generation is going to change.

Does the Electoral College work? Are you happy with a group of electors choosing your president? I write this letter to you, our state senator, because, like many other U.S citizens or residents, I have my own opinion. I am in favor of the idea of changing to popular vote. Electoral College does not work, it is unfair to voters because a president with the highest popular vote could not win,and it could be "disaster factor". Many are familiar with this term: "compromise between election of the president by a vote in Congress and election of the president by a popular vote of qualified citizens"(What Is the Electoral College?,1), but how does it benefit us? Does it express our opinions and preferences? Lets go back in time to the election of 2000, The candidate with the most popular votes was Gore, therefore, everyone was expecting him to win. The mayority was happy with the outcome until they counted the electoral votes, Bush had more electors on his side than Gore. Nobody understood why, they gave the country the president less wanted. Dispite the fact that it was the first time since 1888, (because it happened once and for sure it could happen again), Why did all those people voted if they got the president they didn't trust to rule their country? In History class, my teacher told us: "This country's foundation is for the people to rule the government, in other places (like Italia, Argentina, Spain, etc.) the government takes care of the people, like it they were our parents." I believe we stay true to the foundations and let the people choose the president they want. "The American people should consider themselves lucky that the 2000 fiasco was the biggest election crisis in a century; the system alloys for much worse"(Plumer,1). This quote is based on 1960,when people who favored separation based on race nearly Democratic electors were replaced with the ones who would oppose Kennedy. Many electors make a last minute change in their decision and they decide to go over to the other side and vote against theit original choice, the party's candidate. "When you vote for a presidential candidate you're actually voting for a slate of electors"(Posner,1). Another reason why this system should be abolished is the winner-take-all system. The candidates do not spend time in the states in which they believe they have no chance of winning. States had not even seen the candidate and in some cases, they even haven't seen a poster. For example, Plumer says in a expert from "Mother Jones" that "During the 2000 campaing , seventeen states didn't see the candidates at all, including Rhode Island and Soth California, and voters in 25 of the largest media markets didn't get to see a dingle campaign add." The Electoral College system is unfair to the voters. Overall, My beliefs (and the beliefs of hundreds) is that the electoral college is unfair for the voters because it can be the cause of some major disaster and it can choose the candidate the public is not haoory with. The votes are people who want to express, or show, political preferences, people who are determines to change their country for good, so give them the right to do it. "It's hard to say this, but Bob Dole was right: Abolish the electoral college!" (Plumer,1).

I believe that using the FACS(Facial Action Coding System) is important to have/use in classroom to read students facial expression and to know what they are feeling, because some teacher's may be going through the classwork or the lesson for the day too fast and a student may not understand what is going on and they are too scared or nervous to ask the teacher to slow down and/or repeat what they said so having the facial coding system will help teacher's with that so they either know who to help or realize that they are going too fast and need to slow down or explain it better for other students to catch on. In the reading in paragraph six, it says "A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored in class" the facial coding would be good at helping teacher know what they need to do more in the class, like if a student is bored then the teacher would know that they need to do more fun activities in class that have something to do with the lesson for that day can help with people who are both confused and/or bored, it will help the students that are bored have something to do so they will not be bored and it would help the students that are confused get the hang of what is going on in the class and help them understand. In paragraph six it also says "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor", meaning that facial coding would help teachers be able to know for sure if a student is confused or bored in a classroom. The facial coding system would not only help teachers figure out if a student is understanding classwork but it would also help to find out if a student is having personal issues and won't say anything or they are too scared to say what's going on, it would be more than helpful to know what that student is feeling and asking them about it and asking if they wanted to talk about and/or letting them know that they can talk to you if needed instead of knowing what that person is feeling and letting them keep their emotions bottled up and them not talking to anyone about how they feel and that student ends up doing something that could do harm to them or others. With that being said I believe that having the facial coding system would not only be helpful in classrooms but in schools too.

Some students don't shre there emotions because something bad or wrong happened in there life they don't want to talk about. Why bring it out of them with technology? In paragragh 7 it gives intrusctions on what to do when looking in the mirror. Then goes on to talk about how those intrusctions show a happy face and what those muscle actions show if a person shows a genuine smile or a foced smile. If a person was told to follow those instructions wouldn't that be considered a forced smile. What if a student has a bad day during school and in a lab they have to follow these instuctions in a mirror that would be a foced smile. I think that we should not deal with others emotions or try to figure them out because it there life and if they want to let there emtions out they can. Im not trying to say that you should keep your emotions inside and struggle with them. Im saying that a person shouldn't be watched all the time and studied to find there emotions. In paragraph 6 it talks about in an example if you smile or forwn in a Web ad when it appears on your screen a similar follows or changes. Most poeple hate ads poping up on there screen so why make more pop up according to your emotions. A person with an ad popping up made be fine the frist time, but when it happens over and over again the person may get upset or angry because the ads ar changing his/her emotions. Emotions should be left alone or delt with at the right time, not monitored all the time. I think this technology is an invastion of privacy in a way. People should live there life how they want to live it and if they want there emotions being monitored they can, but if not they have the right to refuse.

As humans, everyone is curious and want to learn new things about our world. NASA is a govermnet organization that strives to find new things every day that will improve our understanding of our galaxy. One of the planets that scientists have looked at lately is Venus. Venus is planet that scientists have trying to find out more about although the planet is very hostile and dangerous. If scientists can figure out more about Venus, we can further our understanding of what this planet is and what it once was. The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" writes his feelings about how dangerous it is as well as how desiring it is to further explore more information about this planet. There are many different things that scientists are intrested about when it comes to this planet. Many studies have shown that Venus might have been at one point the most like earth planet in the solar system. The author states, "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have been supported various forms of life, jut like Earth"(4). The passage further sugests that although it would crutial to find out about this planet there are draw backs. There have been many missions for spacecrafts to land on this planet but none of them "survived the landing for more than a few hours"(2). Although the planet is so close to us, the conditions are very dangerous for exploration. The author informs the reader of the harsh conditions of the planet, but also show the reader insight to possible reasons why it is so worthy of studying. Venus is a very interesting planet and has conditions tht sugest that it was just like earth. There even is proof that suggests that there once was some living organisms on this planet as well. The author informs us by writing, "Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life"(4). Scientist using this knowledge that there were once life forms, can think of solutions for people to go to Venus. This can help explorers and scientist to learn more about how life lived on this planet and what it was like. The drawback to this idea is that Venus is a planet filled with gas and is roughly, "170 degrees Fahrenheit"(5). This temperature is very harsh conditions for humans to live in or even exploring what is on this planet. Although the planet is filled with gas and is not suitable for exploring with robots or people. The author suggest there are many positive things on exploring Venus, like studying life forms and what the planet consists of despit e the challenges that are in the way. There are so many cool things that we can learn about Venus and scientists have no idea what these things might be. Human nature is to descover new things about our world. That is how humans learned new things over time and progressed through civilization. Venus is a very intresting planet that NASA is stil kind of confused about the planet and want to know more about it. If there were solar pannels on Venus then the "solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Never the less, Venus is a planet that is very dangerous and there needs to be many precautions before thinking about putting people on it. Not only is the temperature of the the planet warmer, it is also, "90 times greater atmoshperic pressure than earth"(3). The air pressure on this planet is so much stronger, that it is going to be harder for astronauts to be on this planet for a certain amount of time. The author brings up many ideas regarding how dangerous Venus is, but at the same time humans want to satisfy our curiosity by learning more about what this planet consists of. In conclusion, the author supports that Venus is a worthy pursuit depsite the dangers. The writer did a very good job by using facts to support his claim regarding the exploration of this planet. Curiosity is what mainly drives exploration in humans. Scientists and explorers can not hold back from these drawbacks because in the end, we want to know more about the unknown qualities of this planet and what they consist of despite what challenges we might have to face. Scientists will find a way to learn more about this planet although there are many challenges that lie in their path. Just like these scientists, everyone should not give up because of roadblocks that come their way rather, they should keep trying and think about it differently.

Everyone has different emotions throuout the day. Knowing what someone is feeing is helpul. It can keep you or anyone else from saying or doing something wrong to a person. To have technology in a classroom is next level. When I think of technology being in a classroom to read studednts' mind's I would think of older students, maybe highschool, only because they have so much more going on in their lives, and have many more emotions. I do not think it is a valuable thing to have this technology in a classroom. Some students do not want others to know what they are feeling, teachers would not find it useful through out their day, and this expression reader can fail at any time. I myself do not like telling peers, or others, what I am feeling at the moment or that day. I walk through the hallways and sit in class not showing any expression to how my day is because I am there to learn. Besides myself I know there are so many students who feel the same. They just go to school do complete their tasks and go home. Many students do not have personal or close relationships with their teachers, so talking to them about a problem, if they are upset for example, that was not mentioned to the teacher would make the student feel uncomfortable. What are teachers going to use this for? Give less homework to a student because they are having a bad day according to the expression reader? When students are in a good mood and are happy these emotions fill the enviornment of the classroom with joy. All a teacher really can do is talk to a student about what could possibly be wrong or inform a more speacialized person to work with a student over issues. Lastly, is this technology realy trustworthy? Maybe someday the computer may just stop working, or it may give false information about a student. The author talks about how the muscles move and signal to the computer which emotion a person is conveying, but if there are "instructions for a face that looks happy" then why not perfect the expressions and trick the computer. Overall I do not think that having a computer tell emotions in a classroom is valube, or even necessary. Having one of these computers in a doctors office sounds more efficient. In therapy for someone who is traumitized or mentally emotional patients, where doctors need a better and more accurate answer to how somoene is feeling is more valuable than a classroom, because we like to keep to ourselves, we wont get anything better or worse out of school because of our emotions, and we never know when we might become perfect hiders of our emotions.

In the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars" a NASA air carft Viking 1 discovered a landformation that looked like a face but scientists proved that it's a mesa. Shadows from Marses clouds or from the atmoshpere could've formed the human like shadow. Theorists are saying that there is life on mars but don't have enough evidence from the article to prove so. NASA is wishing that there was evidence that there was life forms for the sake of their budget. These are some reasons that the conspiracy theorists are wrong. When the Viking 1 took the photo of the mesa the maritian skies could've been cloudy,or the Viking's camera could've been foggy. Scientists have ruled out the idea that the picture could've been formed by some type of life form on mars. some scientists have concluded that the are is just another mesa. Which is common around Cydonia,but only with unusal shadows to form the human face. these are the reasons that scientists have ruled the area being a mesa. Here are some more better reasons that prove that the picture from the article is just a mesa. On April 5, 1998 Michael Malin took a better photo of the mesa and uploaded it to a JPL website. But not everyone was satisfied with just this picture, the therorists were stills skeptical about the photo since it was still a little blurry. NASA's mission controller prepared to send another spacecraft to amrs for a better higher resolution photo. These are some better reaosn that scientists have ruled out that there is possible life form on mars. NASA's misson contoller Garvin explains better reason on why the area is just a mesa and not a alien artifact. The photo that was taken in '98 was during the martiain winter,a cloudy time of the year. The cmaera on board the spacecraft had to peer through whispy clouds. On April 8, 2001 Mailn's team captured another photo of the area on a cloudless day on mars. The camera that Mallin's team used was at it's highest resolution so the picture couldnt be clearer. Garvin say's "If there were objects in this picture like airplanes or Egyptian-style prymaids you would be able to see it!", Garvins reasoning for this is because during 2001 if you where looking at the photo from a computer you could zoom in three times more to get a better quality picture. In the article "Unmasking the Face on Mars" there have been theorists that have concluded that there is alien life form on mars,but only from a simple picture that was taken in 1976. Over the years scientists have been sneding spacecrafts to prove these theorists wrong,which they have. in 1998 sciencists sent a team under the leadership of Michael Mailn to take another photo of the mesa,once they captured the photo theorists still beleived that there was life form on mars. In 2001 NASA's misson controllers sent Mailn's team again to take another better photo during a cloud less day on mars. These are the reasons that the pictured caputed in the article is just a mesa not a alien artifact.

Everyday a great many people drive their cars to commute to work, run errands, and sometimes drive their cars for career related purposes. Little do they know that the greenhouse gas emissions that their automobiles create are damaging the environment and creating large amounts of pollution in metropolitan areas. To help reduce the gas emmisions caused by automobiles many countries around the world have created programs and communities that are designed to lessen the amount of car usage in the areas that they are employed in. In doing so they have reduced the amount of greenhouse gasses in Earth's atmosphere along with producing many other benefits. Of all the advantages of limited car usage the most attractive one would definetly have to be reduced pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Not only will people save money on fuel in communities that forbid the usage of cars but they will save the planet as well. According to the article "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars" by Elisabeth Rosenthal "Passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of greenhous gas emissions in Europe ... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States." The information shows that a large amount of gas emissions can be produced by automobiles. Assume that there were a lot of cities that had incredibly low rates of car usage. If those city's greenhose gas emission levels were compared to those of an average car filled city then it would be logical that the car-free city produced less greenhouse gasses. Another positive change that has the ability to happen in cities and communities that limit their car usage is that municipal development can occur. When people start to use cars less and less then businesses would most likely move to more accessable locations which in turn may give the businesses more customers. Due to the increased business in certain stores, stores from different companies will likely move in to areas in and around the one the other businesses reside in to drum up their sales as well. The article "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota" supports my statement in the with the sentence, "Parks and sports centers have bloomed throughout the city; uneven, pitted sidewalks have been replaced by broad, smooth sidewalks; rush-hour restrictions have dramatically cut traffic; and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up." The sentence shows the correlation between lessening car usage and municipal development. In the end, the advantages of limiting car usage are as bountiful as fish in the ocean. From lessening the amount of pollution in cities to aiding the development of cities, limiting car usage can do great things.  

The face is just a natural landform and it couldnt have been made by aliens for certain reasons and here is why. There were no living creatures to be found anywhere on mars. Even in the last paragraph it said it reminded Garvin of most of Middle Butte in the Snake River Plain of Idaho. "That's a lava dome that takes the form of an isolated mesa about the same height as the face on Mars." Garvin also said about the Face. Natural landforms are usually formed by Natural events. Probably the same thing that happened on Mars. When Mars Gloval Surveyor flew over Cydonia for the first time, it snaped a picture ten times sharper than the original viking pictures and all it revealed was a natural landform, no alien monument. Although some said that the alien markings might have been hidden by haze, there still was no alien markings to be found after the next picture they took on a cloudless summer day in Cydonia. It was the best 1976 Viking photo and still no sightings of life on Mars. I do too think there might be forms of life or "aliens" on other planets but just maybe not Mars. After all, Mars is not completly suitiable for life to live on even though its called Earths twin. If we just do enough research, soon we just might find more interesting things to lead us to other forms of life on other planets.

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

Is Venus a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents? Venus poses several dangerous obsticles to pursuit because of how dangerous the planet actually is, which makes the time of pursuing the planet not reasonable and not worth the time for scientist. The author says, "studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents." It is hard already to study Venus because of its atmoshere, which is made up of almost 97 percent of carbon dioxide, makes the planet Venus the hottest planet in our solar system. Which creates big problems for spacecrafts to land on the surface of the planet because of the intense heat that Venus produces. In paragraph 2, the author says, "Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. Maybe this isse explains why not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more that three decades." The author gives good reason to why trying to land a spacecraft is not the best option to obsevre the planet. Instead, focus on another planet that is well worth the time and money of a spacecraft. It would only take moments for the spacecrafts to be liquefied after standing on Venus's surface. Spending more time on a different planet that has an atmosphere and geological features similar to earth would be ground breaking for science and especially NASA. In paragraph 3, the explains, "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenges are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmosphere pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth." Venus is too hot for us to explore. Landing a spacecraft would only last moments because of how severe the weather is on Venus. An environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquify many metals. Also, Venus's geological landscape and weather like erupting volcanoes and powerful earthquakes. In paragraph 6, the author states, "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 atmosphere, rendering standard forms of photography and videography ineffective" Since entering Venus's atomsphere is deadly, even hovering over the planet is not enough for finding more information and observations about the hot planet. Hovering will only give scientist limited details about the planet. Also, having no light shining out of the planet makes it difficult for scientist to observe the planet. Not being able to observe every characteristics of Venus would not make it well worth the mission to study more about Venus. Pursuing Venus is not well worth the time and money for NASA or any other scientist, which does not make it reasonable for scientist to study and want to go more in depth about the hot planet Venus. Venus poses several dangerous obsticles to pursuit because of how dangerous the planet actually is. Overall, Venus is just too dangerous for people to explore, its not convienent for astronomers and NSA.

In the artical "Making Mona Lisa Smile" the author describes how a new cumputer program able to identify humans emotions. I think program could be used in the class room. There are many benifets and some downsides to the program. It can tell if your bored with the lession. It could also help with telling if someone is lying. But can't pick up on nonverbal, and emotional communication. First one of the major benifets of using the program in a classroom is seeing how the students feel about a lesson. In paragraph 6 it satates,"A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored".This imformation could tell the teacher what to do and no too. Paragraph 6 also states,"Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." With the teacher swiching the lession students may become more active with the lesson infront of them. Secondly the program could have some improvements. In paragraph 6 it states,"most humans communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication" This shows that not all emotions can be detected by the program. Also in paragraph 6 it states," So comuters need to understand that ,too" With Dr. Huang stating this he is already aware of this problem. Him being aware can fix that and improve apon it. Finally the program can help dectect lies with curtain muscles in the face. It states in Pargraph 8," But in a false smile, the mouth is stretched sideways using the zygomatic major and a different muscle, the risorius." This shows that key muscles in your face and give away when you lie. It also states that "To and expert, faces don't lie; these muscle clues are sometimes used to spot when a ''smiling'' politicain or celebrity isn't being truthful." When you can identify those muscles a lie will be easier to spot. To conclude i believe this computer program would be useful in the classroom. It could give the teachers direct feed back on the students feeling. Also when someone lies. But can't pick up on nonverbal, and emotional cummunication. The program has more positives than negitives.So I agree this would be vary benifital.

Do you thimnlk we should have a limit of usage for our cars? i think we should! my three main reasons why are because , so we dont /waste alot of fossi fuels,wont make lots of polution and so we can save money and tust me evryone loves to save money!!!!! My first reason why we should have a limit to using our cars are because so we dont waste alot of our fossil fuerol. we go through tons and tons of fossil fuel. It's getting to the point were we might even  run out of it and wont have it anymore and wont be able to make gas and trust me we use gas for just about everything! My second reason why we should limit the usage of our cars is so  we dont produce alot of polution. we produce tons and tons of polution every single time we drive our cars and thats very bad cause it polutes our air and it not good for us to breath it in! My last reason why we should limit the usage of our cars is cause it will vsave us tons of money! i mean keep count everyday how much you pay for gas and at the end of the week add thewm all together and see how much you waste on gas each weeek. also what if your tiers are no good nomore just for a set of 4 its going to bcome up to like $200 dolars !And then what is you need new light or new windshield wipers. ust think how much money you put in to your car. if i were you i would just start walking or rideing a bike! Just a few moments ao i eexplained to you my top 3 reasons why we should limit the usage of our cars because,we wont waste a tonb of fossil fuel,wont produce lots of polutio and it will save us tons of money!

I think you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program because it is very fun. One reason is because if you would like to see a lot of countries, you could see them on this program! Another reason is because you can take care of many animals that are on board. I think you should definitely join! It would be fun to have you here! You would be a big help and very much appreciated if you joined. As it says in the passage, the UNRRA (the United Nations Relief and Rehabiliation Administration) is also very much appreciated. The passage states,"UNRRA hired "Seagoing Cowboys" to take care of horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas." So since my friend and I read it, we decided to sign up. Like it says in the passage, "In August 1945, they recieved their orders to report to New Orleans." Which really means that my friend Don and I recieved our orders to go to New Orleans. In conclusion, I really think you should join. This would be a great opportunity for you. You and one of your friends could sign up together. Like I said before, you would be visiting countries, and taking care of animals. I think you would really enjoy this program.

Have you every heard of a seagoing cowboy, if you haven't well today is you your lucky day. I hope you will want to be one someday because you get to travel the world on a boat and water, and get to ship cargo etc., yes you may get sea sick, but in the end I know, and you know you'll start gettig use to it. A seacowboy is a person who get's to go on cattle-boat trips which is an unbelievable opportunity for small-town boys. You could possible end up seeing Europe, maybe even China one day. It usually takes about two weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the United states, and a month to get to China, but hey it's all up to the water and weather. Being a seacowboy can be very dangerous, because with all the storm that you could get cought in can be REALLY dangerous, and very unsafe, but in the end it is really fun, because you get to see all kinds of different thing like wild life, different countries, etc. So if you ever want to be a seacowboy i wouldn recomend bringing a wetsuit, lots of water and food, some extra cloths, and a camera to hold all of the memories for when you go to go on a work trip. So get those pen, pencils, paper, etc. because i think your going to go to college for a very special, and amazing job. :)

If I was in this situation I would like tell them to take an even better camera. And my explanation for that is because if they want to have a more clearer picture then they should take another one up there. And again they might even get an even bettere and bigger because of the technology we have today. It might be even in high definition so that they can see if thats actually a face or if its just a mountain with craters. But they might get me wrong and thats ok but as long as they have a better camera to explain how or what i'm right about. Like in the beginning of this article it said that they had take pictures in 1976, 1998, and in 2001 but all of those pictures are on cameras that make pictures blury and in order to see if the picture was actually a face they had to do something to make that picure clearer than it shows. They might argue that im wrong because they might say that why will they need the technology and they might say like well we already have a picture and its a face. But it could possibly be something else. It could be a mountain with craters, it can be mostly anything. I also could be wrong becuase they do have a Mars rover up there so my theory can be wrong and it is a face all along. If I was the a scientist at NASA talking to someone about why the face on mars wasent created by aliens i would tell them that extra terrestrial life couldn't of done that because we dont have enough evidence to prove that they exist. But for now we don't know 100% that aliens did it or if metors hit it and it looked like a face or if aliens did it. And if aliens really did it then we need to get nother camera up there and see if there is any other life out there. Then the person who is asking that question would say "havent you guys already put one up there and theres nothing". Then I would come back and say then why do you think that aliens did it if we got nothing on the cameras that we sent up there. So he would be kind of wrong if we dont have any evidence that aliens are out there.

''the challange of exploring venus '' in the number four the author says Astonomers are facinated by venus because it may wee once have been the most earth-like planet in our solar system.long ago, venus was probably covered largely with ocean and could have supported various form of like earth, the author seggest that studing the venus is a worthy because to learn all about the planet because our solar system is the most important in the world it's worthy to know about the planet the planet exist for us to give us sun and cold for our good to be fine and nathing happened to us the world is our all the people live in the world have to worry for the atmosphere the venus has the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system even thought mercury is closer to our sun.beyond high preasure. venus is actually a planet ,in our solar system venus is the second planet from our sun while venus is simple to see from the distant but safe ventage point of earth,it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely in conclusion, is about the planet and aur solar system ,to study about the planet all about the planet is important to know because is important for all the people in the world and the venus to because is the second planet from our sun in the world so venus and mars is our other planetary neigbor,orbit the sun a different speeds the is my conclusion

How would you feel if we had a technlology to read students? face I feel like that technology can't tell if you happy, sad, anger, or disgusted by anything because you can just make any face in it can just say what it is i mean i'm not saying that technology not smart now days, i know that technology can do all type of things i feel like we don't need them type of thing in the classroom. I feel like people don't want to show they feelings a lot of people want keep things to they self. We all want keep a lot of thing to are self the face scan reading people emotional not right but if people something deep i feel like you should share because you can't hide a lot in things in life i feel like it the sametime we should and shouldn't have this face scaning emotional. I feel like people think it good to have for them self i feel like we should get it because a lot of human perform this impressive "calclulation" everyday because you can probably tell how friend is feeling simply by look on her face. But to be on the safe side we can tell how people are doing because some people be lying about how they feel. Would you every use technology to read students emotional? Yes so i can tell how they are doing and if the feeling well or bad today i feel like students should show they feeling because we would know how i person feel intel they tell us.

The adantages of limiting your car useage is sgood becauce it brings down pollution in the air. As a result 70 pecent of Vauban's familes do not own cars, and 57 percent sold a car to move here. "when i had a car i was always tense. I'm much happier this way," said Heidrun Walter,a median trainer and a mother of two. 12 percent of green house gas emissions in Europe... and up to 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United Staes. Beijing,China, which is known as one of the most polluted cites in the world. Millions of Colmbians hicked, biked, skated or took buses to work during  a car-free day yesterday, leaving the streets of this capital city eerfilydevoid of traffic jams.  People particapated in the event when it was raining. Two other Colombian cities, Cali and Valledupar, joined the event. "Its a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution," said businessman Carlos Arturo Plaza as he rode a two-seat bicycle with his wife. The day without cars is part of an improvement campaign that began in the Bogta in the mid-1900s. Its has seen the construction of 118 miles of bicycle paths, the most of any Latin American city, according to Mockus, the city's mayor. We should try to decrease pollution by riding bike, skating, walikng more then using our cars to get us somewhere. Accoridnig to the article '' All of our development since world war II has been centered on the car, and that will have to change'', said David Goldberg, am offical of Transportation for America, a fast growing coalition of hunders of grouos in the United States ... who are prmoting new communities that are less dependent on cars. Goldberg added " how much you drive is as important as wether you have a hybird.

Should we have a facial action coding system for schools? I do and do not think we should. First off I think it would not be a good idea because it's gonna distract the teachers. All the teachers are gonna be worried about how the students feel. Some students do not like talking about their problems at school. The teacher is already gonna know the students emotions before they sit down in their desks. I wouldn't want my teacher knowing all my emotions. Teachers are supposed to teach you but not only just teach but be there if you need to talk to them about something. I feel like its invading privacy of the student. I think we maybe should because it might actually help the teacher learn more about their students. Some students do not like going to talk to the teacher so maybe if the teacher talks to the student they might feel more better and the teacher will also know about that as well. I think if we got it in schools right now it would probably help.

The author explains how studying venus can be a good thing but also very dangerous. Do to human curiosity we will most likely one day discover and possibly live on venus! The author tells readers how NASA is working to make a " Blimp like vehicle" that would hover above about 30 miles above the surface. This would be good to stay out of the way of the rough ground and keep tempuatures around 170 degrees fahrenheit. Also the author explains in paragraph 4 how it was most likely just like Earth many years ago and could be possible for people to live on one day again in the near future. The author also explains in paragraph 6 that with the technoligy that we have today we would have to stay above the surface and would have to use photgraphs to show what the ground looks like from a far distance. The author explains that NASA should spend more time making a space ship or a land cruiser that is able to withstand the heat and pressure from Venus. I think that the author has a good point in trying to find out what this planet is like, because one day it can and will be lived on. The author states that Venus is Earths "twin". By the author stating that, it makes me and others think that it can be used just like Eath. Some have to understand that Venus needs to have many changes before humans can live there and there is a great group of people working on that right now. Thanks to human curiosity and to NASA one day hopefully in the near future venus can and will be a used planet. We as a whole should expand where we travel to explore new places that can be used instead of all cramping up here on Earth.

This technology is kinda dumb. We don't need this to be able to tell how a person is feeling. You can just tell by their facial expressions and how their moods are. Like it said in pharagraph 8 " Muscles called orbicularis oculi pars palpabraeus make crow's-feet around your eyes". "In a fake smile you can tell the difference between a real smile and a forced one because in a fake smile the mouth is streched sideways using the zygomatic mayjor and different muscle, the risorius." So no I really don't think it's something we need to be able to tell how a person is feeling. We already know how people feel when they're are around because of their moods and their facial expressions. I guess it can be a good thing to use for the people that are not good with facial expressions, they can use this technology to be able to understand how a person is feeling.

Driverless cars is a really outstanding invention but also has many negative sides to it. My thoughts about this invention are kind of in between. I feel like they should be invented but every litttle thing about the car should be examed and checked carefully. I dont think driverless cars are ready to come out for like another decade. Driverless car is just a whole new level and people can be wreckless. I would love to have a driverless car but the fact that I need to be alert and cannot fully count on that car to keep me safe or the people around me safe I do not want it yet. We have came a really long way with making new inventions and one of the most creative one, driverless cars. It is a great idea that just needs to be full proof. People need to be resured that the car can drive and be safe on the road while parking or driving on a busy road, especially if the driver isnt fully alert. I think the driverless car needs to be studied more and tested out a lot of time before they come out and people start buying them and getting wreckless thinking they can fully rely on that car. Driverless cars will be such a craze for people that everyone would wanna have a car. Teens and adults can get in trouble with it trying to show it off and doing something immature. The possibilites of something wrong happening is endless. Weather if it is the people being wreckless and not responsible or the car just glitching and breaking down. Our technology has develpoed so much in just the past couple of years. Waiting another ten years for such a big invention wont be any harm. Infact it would be better. Those ten years can be used to do research and examing the car and making it full proof safe and being completly reliable on the car. The car needs to be tested countless times before they come out so we know for a fact that it is safe to drive in bad weather or a busy road. At last, the driverless car is a big responsibility and I do not think it is the right time for them to come out. A lot more researched needs to be done and the car needs to be tested in different kind of weather too. Summer and especially winter on a snowy sleety day. Just to be more safe. Technology only gets better and there is so much than can be added and improved on an invention like that.

Vennus is evaning star and has a bright point of light in the sky. The nikname that is for it is misleading that venus is a planet,the second planet from are sun. It has been proved yhat it is challeng a place to be examine closely. Venus a friend to earth and the closest to earth than any other planet. The density ,size are mostly the same, Venus,Mars is earth neightbor, orbit the sun at different,hottest planet. Previous missions that were unmaned by the spacecraft was issue why it's one spaceships touch on venus in more than a decades. Challeging for humans to study planets. Atmousphere is thick almost 97 percent carbon deoxcide blankets venus. The planet surface tempertures rase averageover 800 degrees Fahrenhit,pressure is 90 times greater than what humans seen, that amount of pessure would crush a submarine. Geology compare it to an erupting valcano ,powerful eathquak. Planet has a rocky surface almost as a valley and mountains , craters. National Aeronautics has one particular reason sendind humans to allow them to float above the fray. Are pressure is clost to are sea level on the earth. Peering venus is ships and hovoring over safely far above the planet so can provide limited insight.

In the article "Making Mona Lisa Smile" it introudeces a new invention, a computer that can reconginize emotion. There are 6 basic emotions it can recongnize such as: happiness,surprise, anger, disgust, fear, and sadness. I strongly believe that the computer would be helpful in some classrooms but not all, depending on the subject. A facial expression does not always tell a emotion. This topic is very debatable depending on whom you ask, this would be a controversy to say the least. There are many ways around this "emotion reading computer", it only takes a fake smile to surpass this. I do not believe an instructor of a classroom should also worry about what emotion the students may be in, regardless they have to do the work assigned. There are very many opinions in this article which do not pursuade other to buy their product such as when they stated: "The Mona Lisa demonstration is really intended to bring a smile to your face, while it shows just how much this computer can do (D'Alto6)." I truly am against the idea of the emotion reading computer due to the fact that many aspects of it seem uneffective. Students may have a tired face or example and the computer may think they are upset about something even though they're just tired. "Making Mona Lisa Smile" may have a good idea, but wasnt thoroughly thought out. They also do not have factual evidence, they state the word "predicts" which shows they don't know for sure how the computers will turn out. I believe that this will be wasted money in buying this product without any proof of the accuracy of the computer, and the way it finds out the students emotions.

To whomever it may concern, The process of the Electoral College has been a problem for many years and deserves to be abolished at its roots. The Electoral College should not be kept due to the fact that not many Americans comprehend this legal process, swing vote catastrophies and other problems, and its lack of democratic pedigree. You may wonder why someone like me is even writing about this or why I even care, but I care about what happens in my country's economy and government, and others should too. First thing's first: knowledge. From personal experiences and research, you may realize that the majority of Americans in 2014 couldn't describe to you what the process of the Electoral College even is. Each state is different in this process, just like each opinion is different about this topic. This is an immensely confusing subject to read about, especially when you're just an average person watching the news or reading an article online. Although, let's be real for a minute: its really difficult. The process consists of selecting the electors, and the meeting of the electors where they vote for our President and Vice President. Also, in school curriculum across the country, you never really go into depth about the Electoral College unless you're taking a hardcore government class. In this case, the students are yet to be informed about the causes and effects of the Electoral College and the disasters it can cause in our economy. Let's continue, shall we? The swing vote catastrophies, the worrying about who will be elected and whether or not they'll do a good job controlling our government, it's just not worth it. Over sixty percent of voters would prefer a direct election rather than the system that we use now. When citizens vote, they're basically voting for slates of electors, who then eventually vote to elect the President as well as the Vice President. The question is: Who are the electors? Who picks them? Are they responsible with the task at hand? The fact of the matter is that you really have no control over who the electors vote for. A "faithless" elector can vote for whomever they please, even if it isn't their party's candidate. This process is extremely unfair to voters across the country, and I doubt the phrase "Life isn't fair", a quote by my grandmother, would even apply to this discussion. As previously stated, the process of the Electoral College isn't the greatest of them all, nor is it fair to voters. I asked who the electors were, and who picks them... but where is the abundant democratic pedigree? To remind you, a democratic pedigree is the origin and history of something, especially when it is good or impressive to others. The Electoral College is outdated and irrational for our modern day concepts. This extensive process lacks alot of opinions, evidence, and background knowledge that is necessary when voting for candidates. On the other hand, there is usually a certainty of outcome in the election, and it avoids run-off elections which is pleasant to citizens who are for the Electoral College. What about the swing votes? What about the values? To wrap things up, the Electoral College is not needed in the United States government because of lack of understanding, disasters that may be caused, and the democratic pedigree and honesty that is nowhere to be found. I hope you consider my decisions and grow very fond of my reasonings. With great appreciation, PROPER_NAME

The Auther supports him idea of exploring the planet Venus very well he states the nolage they have on the planet, what to gain from the planet if they land on it and great reson why to visit it. There is a lot of factule evidence and thereys given in the artical. There is alsoa great number of reson why not to go to the planet but lets see some of the postive resons to resurch it. At the begging of the article there are some facts told about the planet we know as venus in other words the "Evening star". The planet as siad in the text has a clif's type surfes with craters. It is siad that even tho they arent the planet next t the sun they are the hotest planet in the solor syetem. Exploring the planet would be like exploring the deepest parts of the sea. There would be a good way of exploring thr planet by blimp or by a sort of flying veacule to see the planet from above. Secondary the planet gives of a very strong resemblens to earth and its type of featers. Venus is in mostly referded to as Earths twin because of there similaretys. They both travial at the same distince not like the other planets around them that traval at a faster spead. In the Artical they state that "Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size" there tempeter averges about 800 degress Fahrenheit its way over what we see in out own planet. there are a number of reson why NASA should quit the exploasion of Venus. Despiet the knowleg they could gain from the explorasions. Last of all there are a great number of resons why not to explore the surfes of Venus. No shingle spaceship has been on the surfes of Venus in the last 3 years. There atmospher is 90 times greter then ours on Earth. The conditions on Venus are far to sever for just any human to live on. Puting aside all those topics there weather is a constint natural desaster. they have frecuent lightning strikes, earthquieqes and other desasters. In counclusion there arent a lot of benufets to reching the surfes of Venus but the Auther in this story supports his ideas with facts and all kinds of theryes. They suport there ideas with facts and with what could go wrong. There is more then just the good parts of Venus there is also the bad parts of Venus.

In the challenge of exploring Venus, some times called the evening star is one of the brightest points of the light in the night sky, making it simple for even an amateur stargazer to spot. Exploring Venus it can be dangerous because of it's temperature and because of what can happen to you. Exploring Venus can be worthy bacuse scientist say that it well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have suppported various formsof life, just like Earth." Venus it can also be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel. But it can be a little dangerous because Venus has the hottest surface temperature of any other planet in our solar system. One of the challenges Venus has are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. The average of the temperature is over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric preassure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet. Venus has some features that are analogous to those on Earth, it has rocky sediment and inludes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. Scientis belive that Venus could have been once a planet where people could live. Scientist also say that Venus could be dangerous in some ways because of it's temperatures. In the chalange of exploring Venus, sometimes called the "Evening Star" it can be nother planet where humans can live. But venaus can be dangerous, but it also has alot of features like Earth. The temperatures for venus are a little dangerous, because venus is one of the hottest planets in our solar system. NASA it's also working on other approaches to studying Venus. Our travels on Earth and beyond should not be limited by danger and doubts but should be expanded to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation.

Do you think Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers? I think it can worth it because it is one of the planets that is close to us (Earth). Venus is sometimes called "Evening Star," is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky. The things I will get to tell you will explode your mind about Venus. First, Venus is very dangerous to visit. For example, humans have sent numerous spacecraft to land on this cloud-draped world. Each previous mission was unmanned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours. A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus`s atmosphere. In fact, scientists are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long ao, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth. Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth. The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters. Venus can sometimes be our neaarest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration given the long time frames of space travel. Finally, NASA is working on other approchaes to studying Venus. For example, some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus`s surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions. Another project is looking back to an old technology called mechanical computers. These devices were first envisioned in the 1800s and played an important role in the 1940s during World War II. These calcualtions by using gears and levers and do not require electronics at all. Modern computers are enormously powerful, flexible, and quick, but tend to be more delicate when it comes to extreme physical conditions. In conclusion, these are all the details on how Venus is worthy pursuit despite the dangers. They have a lot of factors that makes it so much fun to learn despite it`s danger. Scientist will find a way to reach Venus and study it for years to come. Would you ever study Venus after reading this?

I agree with the author when he suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit. Although I agree even more when he says that is presents danger. There are pros and cons on working with Venus. I agree with him because if him and his scientest discover things dealing with the phisical in venus or just plane facts it could do well for them. Yet, the cons are extreme. In paragraph 2 it states " No space craft survived the landing after a few hours." The space men are going to have to learn new techniques in order to discover and survive. Another detail to go along with that cause is in paragraph 3 where it states " The conditions are far more extreme then anything humans encounter on earth." Theres gonna be a lot of tracks the men are going to face and have to learn to adapt. In paragraph 4, it says that " atronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like thing plamet in our solar system." Maybe this is why the author suggest to look into it becuase it was once like us. Maybe he wants to know how it change so much. Maybe in the near future we can be able to discover why those things happendand why.

Limiting car usage can have many beneficial outcomes for the environment around us. Avoiding car usage will drastically lower greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere, cut pollution in big cities, and make rush-hour easier for human beings. The first thing that decreasing car usage will do is that it will lower our greenhouse gas emissions. In Source 1: "In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars", by Elisabeth Rosenthal, Rosenthal explained that because automobiles are very neccessary to middle-class families all around the world,"it is a huge impediment to current efforts to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions from tailpipes...". Without cars there wouldn't be so many greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and global-warming could be evaded much easier. According to Source 4: "The End of Car Culture", by Elisabeth Rosenthal, Rosenthal again shows information which states that, because recent studies suggest Americans are using fewer cars, "President Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions, unveiled last week, will get a fortuitous assist from an incipient shift in American behavior". With less and less Americans getting licenses and buying cars, greenhouses gases will start plummeting at a faster rate than ever before. Also, lowering the use of cars will decrease pollution in big cities which are usually sorrounded by clouds of smoke. From the information in Source 2: "Paris bans driving due to smog", by Robert Duffer, Duffer said that because of the amount of congestion in the city of Paris, "Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the global city". Paris could have easily avoided the ban on driving if they stopped using cars so much, which would in turn decrease the amount of pollution in the sky. There was a similar situation in Source 3: "Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota", by Andrew Selsky, where in Bogota, Colombia the government created a car-free day where no cars were used at all and people like Carlos Arturo Plaza, a businessman, said that "It's a good opportunity to take away stress and lower air pollution,". Another big city is lowering their amount of pollution as well just because they are using cars less. In addition, an environment less reliant on automobiles creates easier traffic and a more relaxing road to travel upon. In Source 1, a media trainer and mother of two called Heidrun Walter, recalled that "When I had a car I was always tense. I'm much happier this way,". Now, more people won't have the same stress they had in the morning when they had to worry about the amount of cars on the road. In Source 4, Selsky explained that the new car-free day will be "leaving the sreets of this capital city eerily devoid of traffic jams". Without the everyday clutter of cars, streets will easily be more open and easier to drive upon. Although limiting car use seems a bit distant at the moment and very hard to accomplish all around the world, with less cars there will be less greenhouse gases, pollution, and traffic on the road.             

Forida senator, I argue to remove the Electoral College and replace it by changing to election by popular vote for the president of the United States. Voting is not fair to the people because they can't vote for the President, only for the state electors, and even if the candidate that won the most popular votes, may not be elected. Also, the winner-takes-all system is not fair to voters because the candidates don't spend time in states they cannot win in or small states and mostly in swing states. "Under the electoral college system, voters vote not for the president, but for a state of electors, who in turn elect the president." The passage stated in paragraph 10. Voting has changed over many years, but I think that people should be able to vote for the President and have that candidate win the election if they get the magority of popular votes. If the people want to have that candidate as the President, so be it. Although the Electoral College may help by not having a tied election and have a "Certainty of Outcome", but it should be what the people want and vote for. In my opinion, it would be better to not feel like you're putting in a vote that isn't what you wanted. The vote from the people go to state electors for them to choose and that is not truely fair to the people. The candidates should spend time in all states to try to get their vote instead of the winner-takes-all system; therefore, it should be removed. There are people in the state that have voted for that candidate but they don't go to the state because they only focus on the swing states. I understand that they do go there to try to win the election and become president, but they should at least spend some amount of time in other 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." As stated in the passage in paragraph 13. So overall, the electoral college should be replaced by having the popular vote be the decider of who gets to be president. It's fair to the people and to the country.      

The more we use cars the worse it is for our environment. There are advantages of limiting cars use and disadvantages. The advantages will ban the usage of cars in some states like German in the suburb area. Im going to start off by saying that using cars is harmful for the environment. According to the first resource giving to us "Passenger cars are resonsible for 12 percent of greenhouse gas emisiions in Europe ... and upto 50 percent in some car-intensive areas in the United States." But people are saying its a good idea to ban cars. Heidrun Walter states that "When i had a car i was always tense, i'm much happier this way." So to some people there are advatages of limiting car use. Well we also need to clear the air of the global city. It states that "Paris enforced a partial driving ban to clear the air of the gobal city." But humans are also claiming that its making the streets better. "cold night and warm days caused the warmer layer of air to trap car emissions" and also smooth sidewalks are being built and parks and sport centers have bloom throughout the city. Rush hour restriction have cut traffic dramatically and new restaurants and upscale shopping districts have cropped up. The goal is the promote alernative transportation and reduce smog. The driving has decreased 23 percent from the years 2001-2009. That shows you that America's attachment to cars has decreased. The number of miles driven in the United States peaked in 2005 and decreased afterwards. The number of miles driven per person was about 9 percent below the peak and equals to where the country was in January 1995. Some people are saying its cause Americans couldnt afford new cars, and the unemployed weren't going to work anyways so they wouldnt need any type of transportation. Michael Sivake states "What's most intriguing is that rates of car ownership per household and per person started to come down two to three years before turndown." Even New York's new bike sharing program and skyrocketing bridge and tunnel tolls reflect those new priorities , as do a proliferation of car sharing programs across the nation. To Conclude there are many advantages of limiting the use of cars.  The environment is doing beter without vehicles and we need to clear up the air of the global city.

Computer Calculated Emotion Do you really feel the way you think? On an average school day are your emotions connected with your face? How would you feel if a computer could see how you feel? If a computer knew what I was thinking and how I feeel, I would be amazed. Does learning on the computer at school fruastrate you due to not having one on one help. If all school computers had Facial Action Coding System that problem wouldn't exist. The Facial Action Coding System is the new emotion-recongnition software. This software uses video imagery to track facial movements in a real face or even in the painted face of the Mona Lisa. Having a computer sence how you feel will help better educate students. A classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored. Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication, so computers need to understand that too. Having the Facial Action Coding System in computers would not only help out students but also kids out of school. The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive-for video games or video surgery. This will allow kids to enjoy the fun activities on computers. I am totally for the value of using this technology to read students' emotional expressions. This will help students in many aspects. Students will learn better based on how they learn, computers will be able to communicate with students better and kids will enhoy the fun activities on the computers. The Facial Action Coding System will improve the schooling for children. This program should be in a students classroom or even on their personal school computers.

The advantages of limiting car usages is that it lowers green house gases, less traffic, and a reduction in enviromental problems. By lowering green house gases our enviroment will be better. Less lung porblems or other desieses. fresher air and less enviromental problems like global warming. Even smog in Paris or Beijing, even China. No traffic to worry about, no lights to stop at for 10 minutes. The only thing that could make you late for work or school would be you walking to slow or taking a transit or subway. Also, people will be fined for parking in the wrong area, making people want to drive less. A reduction in enviromental problems. Like, global warming or green house gases. less trees would be cut down for parking lots or paved streets. The advantages to limiting car usage would be that it lowers green house gases, less traffic, and a reduction in enviromental problems. Such as global arming, green house gases, and smog.        

What would it be like to study something interesting but has too many challenges? Scientist today are attempting to travel to Venus our closest planet to us. There is just one problem. The challenges Venus has makes it extremly difficult to travel there but that is not stopping them. The author of the text was able to supprot the idea of studying Venus is worthy of a dangerous pursuit well by giving information on how Scientist could gain knowledge, scientist has solutions to withstand the environmentand the closest planet, and even by adding the point on how people might encounter similar experiences. The author was able to support the idea well by stating the knowledge that could be gained from this experience. Venus is similar to Earth in many ways. Scientist want to discover if Venus was ever like Earth but they can not figure that out from a distance as said in the text, "...reasearchers cannot take samples of rocks,gas, or anuthing else, from a distance"(6). By the author pointing this out he was able to support the idea because he gave a valid reason on why they should study Mars. By saying they can not study Venus from afar he is able to give people a reason. People usually want a reason to do things and it has to be good. So by the author providing one he is able to persuade scientist that they should take the risk if they want to learn more about Venus. By including this he did well with supporting his idea. Another way he did well with supproting his idea is by providing information that there are solutions to Venuses challenges. Another way he did well with supproting the idea is by stating solutions to Venuses challenges. NASA has been abel to think of ways to study Venus and it does show good results as in the text it says, "....some simplified electronice....have been tested in a chamber stimulating the chaos of Venus's surfave and have lasted three weeks..." (7). By providing solutions it convinces people that they might have a shot at one day exploring Venus up close. He did well with providing this because people worried about the conditions Venus has which makes it dangerous. The author was able to calm does worries because scientist are now trying to figure out solutions. So by providing the solutions he did well with supporting is idea. A thrid way he did well with supporting his idea is by commenting that this experience would be helpful in the near future. A final wel he was able to support his idea well was providing the point on how human kind would gain experience if they over came these challenges. Human kind will always be curious has said in the text it staes, " ...human curiosity will likely leas us into many equally intimidating endeavors" (8). People will always be curious and it would sometimes lead into challenges they must overcome. By the author pointing that out he is basically saying curiosity gets the best of people and how in this situation curiosity should get the best of them.They would be gaining experience on which they can use in another sitaution. He did well with including this because this could help motivate the people on wanting to study Venus for the experience and for the knowledge they could obtain. The author did well with supporting his idea on studying Venus is worth the pursuit despite the dangers it has. He provided points on why they should explore it he provided solutions on peoples worries on the challenges. He even provided a little motivation on which they can gain experience from studying Venus. So once again what would it be like to study something that has many challenges to overcome?

What is the electoral college?  The electoral college is a process which consists of the selection of the electors, meeting where they vote for president, and the counting of the votes.  The real question is, is the electoral college helping us or is it just bringing our government farther towards disaster? The electoral college should be diminished because it is an unfair direct election, and the disaster factor. To begin, by keeping the electoral college we could avoid run off elections.  This would help our governmental system because as noted by Richard A. Posner, "There is pressure for run-off elections when no candidate wins a majority of the votes cast."  By keeping the electoral college, we could help resolve run-off elections.  What we dont know is if it will permanantly work for our governmental system and is it worth the risk? The electors are the ones voting for the president, so we should question whether they should have control to help avoid these run-off elections.  The writer notes, "... the pressure would greatly complicate the presidential election process, is reduced by electoral college..." (Posner).  Although that is true, that is only one problem that would be resolved by the electoral college, and olne benefit is outnumbered by the numerous disadvantages to the electoral college. Moreover, the disaster facor has a huge impact on the electoral collage.  The writer states, "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" (Plumer).  This disaster was not the first disaster to happen in the system.  According to Plumer, the system has had much more effect and damage on the United States and this should not be repeated again.  The writer also says, "electors have occasionally refused to vote for their party's candidate and cast a deciding vote for whomever they please" (Plumer).  This goes to show, not only is the electoral college unbeneficial, but they can be sneaky.  The electoral college should be abolished because of the atrocious outcomes it is capable of doing to our government. Not only is the electoral college capable of the disaster factor, but it also has no direct election.  As stated in "What Is the Electoral College?", "... when you vote for your candidate you are acually voting for your candidate's electors." (Office of the Federal Register).  This means, voters have no control over whom controls the country.  That is outrageous that the lives of these people will be affected by someone they did not want in the overpowering decisions of their country. Writer Plumer states, "At the most basic level, the electoral college is unfair too voters" as well as "The electoral college is unfair, outdated, and irrational" (Plumer).  Both of these point go to show that the electoral college is lowering our hopes for the government.  The writer also notes, "candidates don't spend time in states they have no chance in winning, focusing only on the tight races in the "swing" states" (Plumer).  This proves that the electoral government thinks about their winning chances instead of our countries government.  Are we going to sit here and let them take advantage of their power that will lead us towards disaster? All in all, the electoral collage should be banished from the government.  Who wants our government to get weaker and more unfair to the citizens?  By taking away the electoral college our government would gain back its strength and become the hard- working government we know it can be!

Driverless cars can be dangerous to use for many reasons. I am against driverless cars for many reasons. The driver of the car might not be alert when they need to be, the car could cause a crash, Also it could do the wrong thing at the wrong time. Theres many more reasons but those are the main ones. When driving a driverless car the driver of the car must be alert at all times. If the driver feel asleep behind the wheel thinking its okay because the car drives itself something bad could happen. Some people are heavy sleepers and might not wake up if the seat just vibrate and that can cause a serious car crash. Also if someone is paying attention to something else like their phones or maybe children in the back seat something can easily happen when it is the drivers turn to drive and they aren't paying attention to the road or whats going on becuase they depend on the car to do everything. Another reason why driverless cars are dangerous is because it could cause a crash. If the car isn't alert when it's sudden road changes or if something instantly happen like a crash infront of it then thedriverles car could crash along with it. Also if its construction work and the car doesnt know about it the car might just take the wrong turn or go where its not supposed to go because it didnt know the sudden change of whats going on. Also if the driver is expecting the car to kow what to do the driver might react late to the sudden changes and the car might just drive off the road or somewhere its not supposed to be. Also if the traffic laws change and the car doesnt know it could run into another car and do something that could hurt the driver and other passengers. The last reason driverless cars are dangerous is because it could do the wrong thing at the wrong time. Lets say something happens to the car or the cameras on it or radar gets damaged and now the car can't tell the difference between the yellow or green light. The car could easily speed up when it's time to slow down and cause a crash with another car. The driverless car also might not know whats going on when people are at stop signs. It could be the other persons right away and the car might go and cause a crash to happen.Also someone could push the brake and the car probaly thinks it should keep going to it might and cause a serious car crash. That's the main reasons why driverless cars are dangerous. They can cause something bad to happen, Th driver of the car might not be alert when they need to be and the car could do the wrong thing at the wrong time. All these reasons could lead to a car crash which could cause the people in the car to die. Thats why I am agaisnt driverledd cars.

Us humans live in this solar system with a handful of planets. We have Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, to name a few. All of these planets can have huge scientific discoveries waiting to be revealed to the known world. Especially one planet, Venus. Venus is often referred to as Earth's twin because it is the most relevant planet within Earth's dimensions. Scientist even say it could well be the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. It was most likely covered in oceans and many various forms of life, like Earth. We should really start pushing exploration into Venus. It is a dangerous mission as no human, with today's technology, can surive the severe climate of Venus. The surface is at average 800 degree's and would burn anyone to a crisp, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than Earth.Even the atmosphere could kill you, with it being almost ninety-seven percent carbon dioxide!Even some of the spacecrafts couldn't survive the toxic,deadly atmosphere for a few hours.These conditions wouldn't make it plausible to even decide to investigate the planet,but is it worth investigating? Venus is worth investigating because its the most similar planet to Earth. We could easily find remains of life forms and push scientic advancments through the roof. It'll help push technological advancments to find even more efficent and safer way to explore other planets. We need to push these boundaries that have been limited on us from the start. Human curiosity will lead to many projects to prolong our lives and to give us humans even more answers to the mystery of the world! We are having revolutinary inventions break through to help us with these types of adventures, NASA have made large advancments with simplifed electronics of silicon carbide that could last three weeks in those types of conditions as the author stated. With these types of electronics we could capture a captivating amount of evidence of life forms, and maybe even find forms of life living in these conditions. With human curosity blasting with adrenaline, humans will push to do anything. We will sooner or later find a way to explore these types of avenues to make groundbreaking discoveries. With an exploration to Venus we could find large amounts of information that could help us even find ways to travel to other planets. There are many planets in the solar system that have many mysteries like the clouds of Jupiter,and with the striving mentality of us humans, we will pursue til the day we die. Human curosity will overcome any form of doubt because of the outcomes of these events. Humans defintely need to start pursuing avenues to explore the secrets of Venus, for the sake of humanities curosity. In conclusion, we should investigate Venus. It portrays Earth, and has many similar qualities to Earth. It could be a sham but it could be a massive discovery for technology and for information. With intellect like ours, we will soon push past the boundaries and find the information we strive for.

When comparing the Mona Lisa smile to othersyou can tell the difference between a genuine smile and a forced one, also Dr. Paul say's there's technology telling what a person if feeling by their face, lastly you can tell when a person is feeling some type of way by a video. The difference between a genuine smile and a forced smile is that, a genuine smile is when you have to use less bones to smile about e6 bones to smile, and you look like your into the smile for a reason, and forced smile is when there's a smile barley on your face and its easy for you to get it off your face. Because, you were barley smiling, and that means your forcing yourself to smile. Technology telling you how a person feel is kind unlikly to happen in this century right now. The only way too know how someone feel is by the way they act toward other people and theirself. they isolate theirself from everyone, and they don't be theirself. When people start looking and things they dont normally look at, or normally watch then you know that something is wrong with them. Because, they not being theirself, and it's not normal for them to do something like that. It would be weird for you, and then your going to want to say something instead of sitting back and watching it happen.

Have have you ever wanted to learn more about something like about a person or maybe... a planet? This essay is on unmasking the face on Mars, is it real? or fake? Well is is in fact real in here are the reasons why. First, it is real because Twenty five years ago we spotted something weird happening on Mars. One of our spacecrafts, The Viking 1, was getting pictures of what may be possible land sites for its sister ship, The Viking 2. It was then that we noticed something strange, it was like a shadowy likeness of a human face. It had an ENORMOUS head nearly almost two miles end to end. it ALMOST looked like an Egyptian Pharaoh. Next, a few days later we unveiled the image for everyone to see...even though we were not sure how everyone would react. But to NASA's surpise, everyone loved it it was in movies, books,magazines etc. There were some people out there who didn't belive it, said it was probably fake and that we were just trying to scare people into thinking aliens were real. But it was real alright and we have the evidence to prove it. Third, even though few scientists believed it to the Face of an alien artifact, the photos of Cydonia became important to NASA when the Global Surveyor (MGS) to the Mars in September. After 18 years, the Viking missions ended. Not every one was okay with though. The Face on Mars is located at 41 degrees north latitude, it was winter in April 1998. It was a cloudy time of the year on Mars. We tried to take a look at it one more time but it was to late. When the cloudiness ended on mars we had put another spacecraft on Mars. when we got pictures back you could then all the detail and more on the face. Even though some people may still not ever believe it, we just want them to just acknowledge the thought of '' What If?''. Then maybe they could see that this really is an anicent alien mark.

The Seagoing Cowboy Heros Do you like going to new places around the world? Would you like to join the Seagoing Cowboys program? If you would, then go to China. The Seagoing Cowboys program is a program to take care of the horses, young cows, and mules that were shipped overseas. Luke Bomberger crossed the Atlantic Ocean 16 times and the Pacific Ocean twice to help people affected bt World War 2. Luke Bomberger had no idea that his life would change soon after his high school graduation. He was working two part-time jobs in a grocery store and a bank when his friend Don Reist invited him to go to Europe on a cattle boat. Luke couldn't say no. He know it was an opportunity of a lifetime. He had to go. It was 1945, World War 2 was over in Europe, and many countries were left in ruins. To help these countries recovert their food supplies, animals, and more, 44 nations joined together to form UNRRA (the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration). UNRRA hired "Seagoing Cowboys" to take care of the animals that were shipped overseas. Luke and Don signed up. Here are some reasons you should join Seagoing Cowboys program. The first reason is that you could travel around the world if you like to travel. The second reson is that you would get to take care of animals, such as cow, horses, and even mules! How cool is that. The third reason is that you can play games! The cowboys played baseeball and volleyball games in the empty holds where animals had been housed. Table-tennis tournaments, fencing, boxing,reading,whittling, and games also helped pass the time. But being a Seagoing Cowboy was much more than an adventure for Luke Bomberger. It opened up the worlkd to him. "Im grateful for the opportunity," he says. "It made me more aware of people of other countries and their needs." And that awareness styaed with him, leading his family to host a number of international students and exchange visitors for many years. So, after i gave you reasons and supported my answer with details, would you want to go to Seagoing Cowboys program??

It's cool to study different things about our Solar System, but some things in Space can be very dangerous, like trying to examine Venus closer. In the passage, it says, While Venus is simple to see from the distant but safe vantage point of Earth, it has proved a very challenging place to examine more closely. I chose this piece of evidence because it talks about studying Venus, on how studying can be a worthing pursuit despite the dangers it presents. In the beginning, it talks about Venus can be a very safe planet to research if we are far away from it. But it also says, if we get closer to it, it can be very dangerous since it is one of the hottest planets in our Solar System. In the passage provided, it talks about Venus's temperature and it's thick atmosphere. Also talks about not being safe trying to get closer to it because it makes an example saying, "Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape. Temperatures would be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans. In the end, it talks about if you try and visit Venus, it's worth it not just because of insight, but because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors. Our curiosity should lead us to meet the very edges of imagination and innovation.

Everyone is trying to find out if the photos from Mars is a face or not. The mysterious face on Mars is just a landform. It is a huge rock formation that resembles a head shape. Different scientists had different perspectives on the mysterious face on Mars, like the unsusal shadows on the planet that made it look like there is a face. The shadows of the head may seem like there are eyes, nose, and a mouth. It made people think it is a real face but it is just an illusion. The shadows may give a way to seem like there is a face. In my opioion, it could be holes on the head shaped form on Mars. When a image realeased on the JPL website, it revealed that it was just a natural landform. From one of the secientist's observations in the text states that, Garvin says that the mysterious face is "very similar to a butte or messa." Which is just like the landfroms on the American West. This proves that the head is just a landform. The face on Mars was not created by aliens, it is just a natural landform. The "face" may have formed on its own from any storms on the planet or winds. In the recent picture of the face in 2001, it looks like there isn't a face. The landform is more solid than the first released image, in 1976. There are more cracks and crevises on the landform on Mars in the image of 2001. In conclusion, there isn't a face on Mars. It is just a natural landform that has has shadows that shows an illusion to make it seem like there is a face. When the image released on the JPL websit,e it revealed that it is just a natural landform. This proves that the natural landform is not a alien monument.

Luke joined the program. He decided to because his freiend offered it to him. Also it was a once and a lifetime opportunity for him. He kenw he couldn't past up the opportunity. Luke also joined because he wanted to help people after World War ll. Some evidence that Luke want to go to the program is? Luke want to go on the ship back and forth from the oceans. Also Luke could be drafted in the miliatry service because he turned 18. Luke said "The cattle-boat trip were an unbelievable opportunity for a small-town boy." Also it took about two weeks to cross the Atlantic Ocean from the eastern coast of the united states and a month to get to China. The conclussion to the story is? Luke want to join the program. Some evidence that Luke said is "I'm grateful for the opportunity." Also Luke said "It made me more aware of people of there countries and their needs." Finally Luke said that the awareness stayed with him. Which help leading his family to host a number of international students and exchange visitors for many years.

"Making Mona Lisa Smile" is an article in which the auother describes the new technology Facial Action Coding System. This newly invented technology can detect your mood just by your face. It constructs a 3-D computer model of your face, all 44 major muscles. Using this technology to read emtional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable. In the article it said, "a classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored." When students are on a computer atempting a lesson, it can calculate their expressions and send feedback to the teacher. If the teacher wants to, they can modify the lesson if the feedback wasn't good. For example, the students can frown if they don't like it, and smile if they do. It's a good way for a teacher to get feedback of what the students actually think. Most schools are turning to you do everything on computers. Some schools make it where you have to purchase a computer and you take it home. They don't have to buy textbooks, everything is just on the computer. When you miss a day because of snow you aren't actually missing a day. You do the lesson for that day on Elearn at home and you don't have to make up that snow day. Even at home you can get feedback from students because they do their lessons on their computers. You can learn a lot from facial expressions and Facial Action Coding System is a good way for teachers to learn what students like and what they don't, even from home. Some people will argue that students won't be truthful and they will just make it a joke. The Facial Action Coding System can tell if you are being truthful or not. For instance, the article says, "in a false smile the mouth is stretched sideways, using the sygomatic major and a different muscle, the risorius. Faces don't lie. These muscles are sometimes used to spot when a "smiling" politician or celebrity is being truthful." The Facial Action Coding System is a good way for teachers, principals, and guidance counselars to get feedback. It's valuebale in the classroom as well as outside. Maybe the next move is putting it in big cooperations or little companies!

Dear State Senator, I personally believe that electing a President by popular vote  is a great way to elect the next president. The reason why I state this because ,when voting in an electoral college  the people are voting for a slate of electors instead of the President they want to be in office. But on the other hand,the popular vote declares the candidate that  recieved the most popular votes is the next president. We the peolpe want to vote for the next person to run our country , not a slate of electors. Sometimes the election doesn't go as planned. Back in the election of 2000 Candidate Al Gore had more popular votes than Bush ,but Bush had more electoral votes and became President. I bet the people of America weren't to happy about that outcome , this was the first time this happened since 1888. Let's look at the election of 2012 , it states that our current President Barack Obama had "recieved 61.7 percent of the electoral vote compared to only 51.3 percent of the popular votes cast for him and Romney ." It also states that residents of other regions that don't neccesary have electoral votes want a popular vote because " residents of other regions are likely to feel disfranchised to feel that their votes dont't count that the new president will have no regard for their interest , that he really isn't their president ." Now if the country went by a popular vote the peolpe would have a president that meets their needs and betters the economy for them instead of regions only getting what they want ,now everyone has their president. The President they voted for, not the slate electors.    

Some people may think that it is a valuable thing to have an emotional regontion in a classroom but i dont think it is valuable because then you would be invading someones feelings and thatts not fair. I also think that just because we have all this new and improved technolgy shouldn't mean to use it. One reason I say it woulldn't be important to to have a facial regontion in a class for students is because maybe the kid is angery or sad and if you find that out then talk to them about it it could bring up bad memories so the kid would eventualy just shut down and not talk at all. Another reason is that you could trigger some built up anger and then they could cause a bunch of unneeded choas or potentiely they could judt have enough of the bull crap and take matters into their own hands and i'm just saying but it could also cause more school shootings and this point in the U.S we don't need that on our hands. the final reason is that anymore technology is getting to out of hand in eyes like whatever happend to going outside and having fun instead sitting in frount of a screen play your life away to video games when we could do something to make this world a better place. Thats why i say that we don't need a facial regonition system to read a kids emotions because it would be more of a big mess then it would be doing anygood.

Are driverless cars a good idea? Driverless cars are a terrible idea because of how dangerous they will be. It is like a robot, anything could happen to the car at any time and then you are stuck, unsure of what to do. This could cause lots of accidents, just knowing that a human will not be operationg the car. In case of an accident, whom is to be blamed, the machine or the "operator". These cars should not only be illegalized in the United States, but they should be illegalized everywhere. Just to say, perhaps something goes wrong with your machine, breaks go out, steering control column gets thrown off, or a control sensor is broke while driving. How will the car know to pull off the road or even know where "off the road" is? The cars will not know, what to do they are desgned to just drive and the manufaturers are not thinking about, what if something goes wrong with these cars? They are just in it for the money, they are trying to beat all of the other companies. As the passage states, "When these vehicles break down , no one will be there to repair them!" These cars are pretty much just for big money skams, they will come out and be big for a while, then later on everyone will find out they are horible. What happens when these sorts of cars are in an accident, who will be to blame? There will be accidents with these cars, but when they are in accidents, who will be to blame the car or the operator? No one knwos how this would really play out in court because stuff could break on the car and the car just lost control. If this would be the case you couldn't blame the operator, but you also could not blame a car in court. This would mean that the operator may have injuries, but the biggest thing is that he may not have a car anymore either. Such as the author states, "How will anyone be put to blame in case of accidents or break downs, but most importantly, if the car is at fault how would the other operator get his or her car fixed?" This is the biggest thing of all, is who is to blame in these cases? Sure these cars will be pretty nice and all, but is a driverless car worth the risk of hurting either you or your family? No it is not, that's why these cars should not be legal in the U.S. or anywhere else. As the author states, "This matter should not only be talked amongst the United States, but also everywhere else in the world to." The author is very right about this because these cars are very dangerous and should not be aloud to be driven. In conclusion, these driverless cars should not be legal anywhere in the world. They are dangerous and not safe for anyone. A lot could go wrong with these vehicles and could possibly injure someone. Can things not just be kept simple ,and have people quit being lazy and drive thereselves everywhere rather than having a robot do it. Incidents may happens with humans to, but there is nothing but problems to come out of driverless cars!

Dear senator, the Electoral College has always been a good way to elect our leaders, and it is the best way to do it. It has the ability to use swing states for better voting, larger and smaller states get diffrent amounts of electoral votes, and presidents cannot be elected by a region alone. The effect of having swing states because of the Electoral College is a positive one because when a state feels like they have a chance of having their candidate win, they put more thought into the vote they cast knowing that their vote counts. Having voters put more thought into their votes instead of not caring as much gives the better candidate a greater chance of winning, if one candidate was truly better than the other. The more thoughtfull canidates in a swing state will pull more information from the candidates campaigns. Popular vote does not use the winner takes all method so the idea of swing states will no longer have any effect in the election. Another great reason why the Electoral College is better than popular vote is because depending on the size of the states a certain amount of votes is given to the electors. Larger states get more attention from presidential candidates because of the majority vote in the particular state. if there was only popular vote then presidential candidates could waste their time on smaller states when they could of been winning larger states. The varying amount of electoral votes for each state depending on its size also allows for a more equal and fair election, due to the less populated states not being able to have more electoral votes then the more populated states. The Electoral College allows that presidential canidates cannot win the election by reigional appeal. This means that if a particular reigion favors a candidate they cannot win by only a single regions votes. This makes the candidates campaign less in regions that are more likely to be won and more in other regions. But with the Electoral College this makes it harder for a candidate with only regional appeal to win because other regions feel like their votes will not be as effective towards the election. With popular vote a presidential candidate will not know where to campaign and where not because there is no winner take all method. This is why I belive that having the Electoral College is superior to popular vote when we the people vote for presidential candidates.  

Many scientist believe that studing venus can be dangerous but it is worthy to learn about it. The author has very good point that we should find out more about Venus. They say that Venus has been covered in oceans in the past. It may have provied life like earth did."Often refered as Earth "twin ", Venus is the clsoest planet to Earth term of density and size , occasionally the closest distance too." states the author. This means their might have been life before in Venus. Even though it is dangerous to explore I feel that we should beacuse it is important to learn about our planets. Venus reaches the average 800 degrees Fahrenheit. "The atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experienece on our own planet." Those are hard chellenges that scientists have to phase when exploring the planet. It is so intresting to learn about our planets. We can compare them. "Venus has the hotest surface tempertrue of any planet" staes the author. Today Venus still has some of the same feature that are the same. Like our planet, Venus has valleys, moutains and craters . The planet also have strong earthquakes, and tunderstorms. Thsi makes it extra hard for scientists but its makes it hard. In text it states that "Solar power would be plentifuol and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions but survivable for humans. In coclusion, it is challenging but anything is possiable. I do agree with them."Our travels on Earth beyond should not be limited by dangers and doubts but should be expand ed to meet the very edges of imagination and innovations." We should not have fear of exploring. That is what the author is saying. We should all agree with this. Life may be hard but we should explore.

I think that Popular vote would be better than the Electoral College because then the votes would be fair. The Electoral College is not fair for some states. A lot of people say that one vote cannot do the job. I agree because they should let the people decide what president they want to have. Some people may disagree on that. Maybe other people want just states to vote, and get it over with. It would be an easier way to choose the president, but i think popular vote would be a lot more fair than Electoral College. The popular vote allows people to vote on what president they want to vote for, it would be kind of difficult to count all those votes, but it would get the job done in no time. The Electoral College in the other hand, allows votes from states to be made. It is an easier method to get the states to vote for the president, and it takes less time. The popular vote would be the best way to go. Others may have different opinions, maybe they like the Electoral College better than the popular vote. I would choose the Popular vote over the Electoral College. Many people say that the Electoral College is unfair, outdated, and or irrational. Even a person, that goes by the name of Bob Dole, said to Abolish the electoral college. The Electoral College also avoids the problem of elections in which no candidate receives majority of the votes cast. It is said that this method may turn off potential voters for a candidate who has no hope of carrying their state. It also requires a presidential candidate to have trans-regional appeal. They should really try to make the Electoral College the best method that there can be. Popular vote is already a challenge, but they should also try to improve the popular vote method.

The Natural Landform on the Unatural Planet Seeing something that you can't really tell what it is is frustrating, right? NASA and conspiracy theorists totally know what you are going through. NASA found a "Face on Mars" and now everyone thinks it has something to do with aliens. Well, they are very wrong. NASA would have benefitted from the "Face of Mars" if aliens had anything to do with it, NASA took a picture on April 5, 1998 snapping a higher resolution picture, and on April 8, 2001, they took a picture at the sharpest point on a cloudless summer day, proving for the second time that it was just a landform. The skeptics may have their points on to why it may be created by aliens, but NASA has three amazing photos to prove them wrong. The Face on Mars is not really a face after all. To begin, NASA's budget would have benefitted a lot if the landform had anything to do with aliens at all, so why would they want to keep it a secret if it were true? First things first, When NASA revealed the photo of the huge landformation it became a huge hit! They were hoping to catch the attention of Mars to the public, and boy oh boy, they did just that. It starred in a Hollywood movie, appeared in magazines, books, radio talkshows, even haunted grocery store checkout lines for 25 years! Unfortunately, the positive popularity always comes with the negative. Some conspiracy theorists thought that the Face was bona fide evidence of life on Mars, evidence that NASA would rather hide. Defenders of NASA's budget can only wish that there was an ancient civilization on Mars. Secondly, on April 5, 1998, Mars Global Surveyor flew over Cydonia, the section on Mars where "The Face" lives, snapped a picture of it ten times sharper than the original Viking photos. The picture proves again that the face is just a landform. The conspiracy theorists and people that supported their opinion were still not happy with the results. They said in paragraph 8, "The camera on board MGS had to peer through wispy clouds to see the Face. Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze." I don't know how they get these crazy assumptions, but they will just never give up! They went all the way back to take a second picture to prove they're wrong, don't you think that shows that nothing about this landform is alien infested, or was created by them? Last, but not least, They took a second picture of "The Face" at the highest resolution possible to prove to the opposing side again. “We had to roll the spacecraft 25 degrees to center the Face in the field of view,” said Garvin. “Malin’s team captured an extraordinary 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. Garvin proved the correct point for everyone, hopefully having everyone believing that "The Face" is not a face, just a lava dome. On the other hand, the other side had a bit of detail to help support their side as well. Their first assumption was that in the second photo, wispy clouds covered any alien like markings. To prove that wrong NASA took another photo at the highest resolution to prove that it is just a natural landform on Mars that has nothing to do with aliens. The skeptics will probably never give up on how this was made by aliens, but NASA has three extraordinary photos to prove them wrong every single time. In conclusion, "The Face" is just a natural landform. NASA would have benefitted from the "Face of Mars" if aliens had anything to do with it, NASA took a picture on April 5, 1998 snapping a higher resolution picture, and on April 8, 2001, they took a picture at the sharpest point on a cloudless summer day, proving for the second time that it was just a landform. The skeptics can try to find every way to show that aliens had something to do with it, but they don't have three pictures of the landform itself. Real facts beat assumptions every time. Mars may be a mysterious place, but what isn't mysterious is the natural landform on Cydonia.

December 30, 1957 "My name is Luke, Luke Bomberger. The Seagoing program was a opportunity of a lifetime for me. Yes, there were many struggles and hardships but I got through it. You should really join the program it gives you something new to try in life. Also, it helps recover food supplies, animals, and much more for the 44 nations who joined together to make the UNRRA. There are amazing places you can go to. For intance, we took a trip to Greece. The Acropolis there was something special. In this program there is never a dull moment. You're either taking care of the animals, sight-seeing, being at night watchman. There is also times to have fun. The othercowboys and I have time to play games or do on board such as baseball, volleyball, table-tebbis tournaments, fencing, boxing, reading, whittling, or other games to pass the time. Since there are struggles to this job I might as well say them too. This job is much more than a adventure, it shows you unbelievable things in this world. My aunt Katie helped me prepare for this. She might not have known it but she did. The thing is though that I was never prepared of the dangers at sea. It was only my second trip and I served as a night watchman. That night I was to check on the animals every hour and to report to the captain. It was a very rainy night. After I had made my hourly report to him I was sliding down on my backside a slippery ladder. My heart was pounding I was slidding feet first toward an opening on the side of our ship. Luckly a thin strip of metal on the edge of the ship saved me from going to the dark Atlantic ocean. I was very happy that I was alive but I could not work for a few days or so because i cracked my ribs. There are advantages and challenges apart of this job. Some challenges may be risky but if you join the Seagoing Cowboys program you are doing this for a good cause. If it weren't for my friend Don Reist I might have never joined this program. This was a truly amazing experience for me and also some other men like me." There was a round of applause from the crowed. Then a young boy, Jacob says to me " You are really inspiring to me. I really loved your speech and makes me want to be in the Seagoing Cowboys program now." "Thank you. Keep trying to persue that dream, son." After that we talked a few more minutes and then waved good-bye.

Dear Florida State Senator, I belive that we should change the way presidents win the election. I dont think it sould be based on what the House of representatives and Senators think. It should be based on popular vote by the citizens. After all, isn't about what the people want. What is the Electoral College? "The Electoral College is a process, not a place." (Source 1, section 1.) It was a compromise between congress and the citizens, formed by the founding fathers. In the Electoral College there are 538 electors. Just over half of the congress has to agree for one, to be elected President. In the end it doesn't matter what the citizens want. Who ever gets more votes in the Electoral College, wins presidency. Why do I not agree with the Electoral College? I do not agree with the Electoral College because, for example take Al Gore. He would have on won presidency by citizens popular vote if it hadn't been for the Electoral College. "Over 60 precent of Americas voting population, would prefer a direct election." (Source 2, section 9.) I also belive it isn't fair to smaller states. Electoral College is based on your states population. You have small states like Alaska and Hawii who only have 3 or 4 electoral votes and other larger states like Texas and Florida who have 29 or 38 Electoral votes. The candidates running for president go to large states more so than small states, because they know that if they persuade the big states the will the election. "The Electoral College may turn off potentail voters for a canidate who has no hope of carrying their state." (Source 3, section 23.) This causing not alot of people to vote in larger states. Overall the Electoral College is not a good method for electing the Pesident. The Electoral College is unfair, non-useful and outdated. Its sad because everyone who votes, thinks that their one vote matters. News flash, because of the Electoral College it doesnt matter!      

Venus, a planet that is the second closest to earth, and maybe second earth to be. The author suggests that the study of the planet Venus is worth pursuiting despite the dangers it with holds. Venus is a planet that once had bodies of oceans and perhaps life living on it. The planet does contain high heat tempuratures as well as atmospheric pressure that is 90 times greater than what we experience here on earth. The conditions of Venusian geoloogy and weather present additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquales, and frequent lightning strikes to probes seeking to land on its surface(paragraph 3). The solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. These are not easy conditions but tolerable and survivable for humans. In conclusion, the planet Venus should be worth studying and finding discoveries that would make living on Venus easier. The dangers and doubts should ot keep us from striving at our best to succeed.

My position on driverless cars is, I believe they are very dangerous and should not be used by anybody. Although they may be nice when you don't want to drive somewhere but need to go, I do not believe this is something Americans should be taking up for various reasons. First off, I do not think self-driving cars are very safe. If I were to be in a self driving car, I would not be able to relax and trust the car to do the driving, because i'd fear it hitting something causing an accident or just stopping in the middle of the road. Even if the car had automatic stop and auto break systems, I would still have to be very causious and keep my eyes on the road, which is similar to driving a car, so why not save the anxiousness and drive? I believe Americans are getting more and more lazy, therefore they want a self driving car instead of just driving themselves. I think that driving yourself and making sure you are safe, is much better of an idea than putting you're trust in a computerized car. Many questions come to mind when I think about self driving cars. A question that comes to mind while thinking of driverless cars is, whose fault is it if an accident is caused? Would you blame yourself for the accident or the cars since it was driving? Many problems would arise when dealing with this. For example, if the car industry blames the accident on the person, the person could sue the car company stating that it was the car in control, therefore not being the persons fault, it would be the cars. On the other hand, car industries could argue that the person should've been paying attention to the road, and not putting in their full trust with the car. In conclusion, there is a lot to think about when dealing with driverless cars, whoses fault accidents would be, what the new age limit for driving would be, and also whether or not to put you're trust into these cars. Many problems and conflicts would occur, therefore I believe the people should stick to driving the cars. How hard is it to drive a car by ourselves, do we really need the help, or are we just too lazy to want to drive places? Although I admit it would be nice to not have to drive when going on long distance trips, I dont think i'd be able to trust the car to drive for me, and I wouldn't be able to relax when dealing with a self-driving car, even if it had been tested multiple times. I don't think i'll ever be switching to a self-driving car.

Have you ever been on a boat, well, Luke bomberger has. He was a part of a program called the Seagoing Cowboys. He was a cowboy that carried cattle and farm life from one place to another after the loss of many animals after World War II. Today, he would encourage more people to join the Seagoing Cowboys program because it is a very great thing to do and you can travel and visit many places you have never visited before. When he was doing the job, Bomberer visited several places including, China, Europe, Greece, Italy, Crete, and Panama. Out of them all, Greece was the most special to him. Luke knew what an amazing offer it was from the beginning and he knew he couldn't turn it down. And he would encourge you to join because if you ever thought abut joining the military they would accept you and let you serve by being a Seagoing Cowboy. In conclusion, you should become a Seagoing Cowboy because it gives you opporunities, palces to travel to, experiencences , other jobs, and different culturers to endure and discover and make you a person who has seen and done amazing things that other people cant say they have done.

The use of this technology for a classroom full of students will not be valuable. Although it would be interesting to see what the students are feeling during a lesson. How is the data going to be of use in science? The students can express their feelings, but what are the researchers going to do with this information. This technology should be used, but not in the classroom. If we do end up using the system to detect emotions where will the data go. It will help the video game industry with the evidence from paragraph 6 "The same technology can make computer-animated faces more expressive-for video games or video surgery." Why only put this into a classroom put it into the robots we are building today so they seem more human-like, so they can become more advanced than a ordinary robot. The direction the researchers are taking are great, but the choice of where to put it needs to be different. Just putting it into a classroom would be a waste of time and money. There is so much wasted potential if the system is put into a classroom. we could use this technology for bigger and better things. For instance better facial recognition security systems so it can be more accurate reading faces and does not open or let in anyone that looks like the person. Or lock the person out of anything that is protected by facial recognition. Another example of how this could be useful in other ways is the facial recognition can be used in the police force to find a match of a person that was caught on camera to be tracked down and captured. The way that the researchers are using it for is inefficient and wasteful and should not be implemented in classrooms.

The thought of having a driverless car appeals to many people for many reason. Some would feel like they could do other things such as talking on the phone would become safer with this. Others could feel like it would be a step closer to possibly having a floating, driverless car. With all this, people have to ask themselves, what could be the negative effecrs of having a driverless car? Diverless cars should not be delevoped, because there are still many unknown answers. There have been many advancments on car safty since automakers used speed sensors in the wheels when they created antilock brakes in the 1980s. Now adays you can buy a car that can detect when you are going to back into something that you can't see or came out of nowhere. With the driverless car, you have to worry about something malfuntioning while you're in the middle of traffic or if the car stopped working altogether. In paragraph 9, the author says "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault - the driver or the manufactures?" This is something that many people will debate about. Some will say that it was the manufacturer because they didn't check car to see if it had any faults. While others will say that it was the driver because they "behind the wheel", but whose fault would it really be? Many teenagers look forward to being able to drive. They may study for long hours and practice parallel parking so they can pass their drivers test, and the long a waited drivers license. Would the develpment of driverless cars take away the need for having your licence altogether? People would assume that anyone could have one because they wouldn't driving. Even with this, people would more then likely need to be tested on how to operate a driverless car and be trained to be able to look for signs that the the car has a technical problem that needs to be fixed right away. With every new discovery and advancement, there are many questions that still ned to be answered. Driverless cars should not be develped because there are still some important answers that still need to be looked into. Many safety issuses need to be disscused, as well as what would be the sutible age to be able to opperate one.

If i was a NASA scientist and some one thought it created by alien and i had to tell a person it was not created by aliens this is how i would tell them. First, the human like figuer has become a priority to NASA. The image is not as human like as it was in 1976. In pargraph 9 it reads mars global surveyor is mapping is normally looks straight down then scans the planet in narrow 2.5 km wide strips. The image was taken with a 3D altimetry. Aliens are not real the are just things people beleived are real. Also it is dissappearing over the years. The image that is called the face of mars is really a mesa. NASA's viking 1 was circling the planets for sites. When viking number 2 spotted the figuer. Jet propulsion lab when it appeared on the monitors. The imade appeared to be a huge rock formation a few days later. It engaged the public and attracted attention to mars. The image has become a huge pop icon it has been seen in books,magazines and also heared on the radio talk shows. There was no alien monument after all so that ment is was not created by an alien. It was a natural landformation. Most people were not satisfied with the answer. The malin's team captured an extraordinarty photo using the camera absolute maximum resolution. The image is vey small it was compared to sometimg in Eygpt. That is how i would tell someone that it was not created by alien. Firslt i would tell them it was a nurtrual formation. That it looks that way because of the camera it was too with. Last that aliens are not real they are make believe. That is how i would tell them if i was working for NASA.

Hi, I'm Luke Bomberger. I was a Seagoing Cowboy. You might be pondering what that is, and if you are, I will inform you. Seagoing Cowboys help animals, mostly horses, donkeys, cows, and mules, that are being shipped overseas to avoid harm get to their destination. Are you thinking that you maight like being part of this program? Here are some other good things about being a Seagoing Cowboy. As I said before, you can help animals that are in danger and get to know them. This gives you a good feeling of helpfulness and compassion. I love to save lives, especially if they're animals'. I also liked to be freinds with them. Even though there are many other people on the boat with you, the creatures all have their own personalities, and this makes them fun to hang out with. Another good thing about being a Seagoing Cowboy is that you get to see the world. I have seen the Acropolis in Greece, the Panama Canal, and an excavated castle in Crete. I have been to Europe, China, and Italy. You can go to all of these places, see these sights, and more if you join their program. Fianlly, there are so many people on the boat with you that it is impossible not to make a friend and have fun almost every day. I have made ample new companions. There are also many games played on the ship. They include baseball, volleyball, table-tennis, fencing, reading, boxing, and whittling. As you can probably tell, these are all exciting to do with your buddies. Now you can see why theis program is so important and fun. Although there are a few risks, such as stormy weather, it is worth it to see the animals get safely to their destination. You can join knowing that you will be making big differences in millions of creatures' lives. If you want to have an amazing time with friends, play enjoyable games, see awesome landmarks and buildings, and help and make friends with animals, you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program.

Making Mona Lisa Smile Essay In the passage Making Mina Lisa Smile using detail from the text its asking me to discuss whether the use of technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable and from the text i have pulled out a couple of facts to support my anwser ,my first reason is that in paragrapgh four its says the facial expressions for each emotion are universal observes Dr.Huang, even though individuals often show varying degrees of expression , well that statement right there gives us a idea on how every emotion is differnt and unique in it's own way and an example to support my first respone is in paragrapgh 5 it says for instance, you can probably tell how my friend is feeling simply by the look on her face, Of course ,most of us would have trouble actually describing each facial trait that conveys happy,worried and etc, Artist like sanVinci studied humananatomy to help them paint facial muscles precisely enought to convet specific emotions. The monta lisa demostration is really intended to bring a smile to your face, while showing just how much this computer can do , Dr.Huang predicts that it could modify the lessom like am effective human instructoe, The same technology can make a computer-animated faces more expressive- for videogames or video surgery. In the passage its stated that after the Facial feedback theroy of emotion, but also may even help produce them.

Did the author support their idea well in this article? I do believe he did. I saw many reasons as to why we should at least try to go to venus. He gave many reasons as to how Venus is very simillar to Earth and could be inhabited one day. He also gave many reasons as to how it could be dangerous, and why people haven't really been able to do so yet. They mention things about what Venus has done to other space crafts in the past, and what it can do to others now even. The author gives many reasons as to why Venus is reffered to as Earths "twin." He says, "Venus is the closest planet to Earth in density and size, and occasionally the closest in distance too." In this he tells us that Venus is like Earth in the ways of how dense it is and how large it is. He also says that it is occasionally close to us, so that shows us that it could be just like Earth, but with some differences. The author also says in paragraph 4, "it may have once been the most Eath-like planet in our solar system. Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported many forms of like, just like Earth." With this he is telling us that there could be fossils, or we could one day maybe inhabit Venus if needed, with adaptations of course. The author also says that the journey would be dangerous. He mentions in paragraph 2 "each previous mission was unmanned, and for a good reason, since no space craft has survived the landing for more than a few hours." In this he is telling us just how dangerous it is, because tipically you would think of a machine being tougher than the human body, but as you think about it you can see just as fast as that machine was destroyed. If that machine was destoryed so quickly imagine how quickly the human body would be. He also says "not a single spacecraft has touched down on Venus in more than three decades." This also lets us know how hard it would be to get there and how fast, if the right materials aren't used, something can be destroyed during the trip. The author then gives us NASA's plan as to how somebody would be able to access Venus in paragraph 5. He tells us that "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would be to allow scientists to float above the fray." He gives us this idea so that we can think about it being a safer route and that maybe with this method somebody could be able to make it. With his evidence in the previous paragraphs we can conclude it would be very dangerous to land on Venus, but not to be above it. He also gives us a scenario of what it would be like for the scientists floating above. He tells us, "a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up out of their way.. temperatures would still be toasy at arounf 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth... radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." By telling us this he is saying that it wouldn't be the most comfortable thing, but it would be liveable. He is showing us that it would be possible, and if they really wanted to, they could explore Venus. In paragraph 8 he mentions that the "scientist floating above would only give limited insignt," with this we can see that there still wouldn't be everythig solved, but we would still be closer than we've ever gotten. He also says in paragraph 8, "most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere, rendering standard forms of photography and videography ineffective." Meaning that the scientists wouldn't be able to photograph anything on Venus to look at later. The scientists would only be able to look at things closet than anybody ever has, but not be able to document any of it. With this we can also see that we wouldn't be able to see what Venus looked like from Earth, making it hard to report back on findings and research. All in all I beleive the author did support his idea well. He gave the pros and cons and was able to explain everything out. I myself don't know it it would be worth all the money in supplies, but I do think with NASA's idea we can get closer than we've ever gotten before. The conditions would be liveable, but maybe a little uncomfortable, and we could get some good information on Venus. If Venus is as closely related to Earth as the author makes it out to be, then maybe it could be worth a shot, but I am still debating on it. It's nothing the author did, because he did explain and support everything very well, but I've always had very strong opinions on everything.

I would argue in favor of keeping the electoral college because its bests to vot eby what the people want in able to keep a good country. I also think that if people werent allowed to vote how would the main leaders know whats the right and what is the wrong. To start off , due to the passage ''Electoral college'' is a process in which the founding fathers established in the constitution as a compromise election of the president by congress and qualified citizens! NOT the leaders! If your want to run for president your main goal is to get people to follow you with impression and facts. Each presidential election occurs every four years. Candidates enter in election competing against each other,'' the people'' watch if the candidate will be worth a president. Candidates will be eliminated one after another till there is only one winner. Without the electoral college how would the people know if the president is trustworthy to the country, mainly people just want someone who is willing  to make the right changes. Like i said the leader's main goal is to get people to agree  and make them think that you are worth for the job. No one will appreciate someone making the laws without people agreeing the people would be furious and the word freedom wouldnt exsist anymore in the country. Freedom is all about peoples rights! Electoral college is a main process that is need to be able to make freedom for the citizens.     

Car usage all over the world has reduced and been reducing slowly. Some of the advantages of limiting car usage may be the reducing of pollution or just to save moeny. Also due to many different reasons, even if it's for their own needs, or to just minimize the pollution going on in different parts of the world. In many places car usage has been being limited for countries all over. If it's China, Spain, Columbia, Paris, Germany, or even the United States of America. Not all countries have taken part in trying to reduce the use of cars to an all time low. That may just be their own choice. While other countries are sure trying to cut the usage of car for a variety of reasons. Some places in the world are doing it so they can cut some of the pollution done to the world. And if you think about it if half of the world tryed as hard as they possibly could to try and minizie pollution the world wouldnt be so pulloted. I know cars aren't the only things that cause pollution, but its a pretty big part of the daily life for any person no matter where they are. In Vauban, Germany a suburban area has almost completely given up driving and even owning a car. "Car ownership is allowed, but there are only two places to park" (Rosenthal 2) but it cost a lot of money to even own a parking space. "Car-owners can buy a space, for $40,000, along with a home." (Rosenthal 2) That price may just be enough to keep people from owning a car all together. According to the article " In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars " by Elisabeth Rosenthal, 70 percent of Vauban's Families don't even own a car and 57 percent sold a car just to move there. Isn't that crazy? Imagine life without cars, it has advantages and disadvantages of course but advantages can lead to a positive outcome no matter what the reason is. By people in Vauban not owning cars they are most likely saving a lot of money because they don't have to buy the car, pay the ridiculous amount for a parking spot, and pay for the gas thats going to end up pollution the world anyway. Just a few of the many advantages in reducing or cutting out car usage completely. Due to all the terrible and mass amounts of smog in Paris, France, they enforced a "partial driving ban to clear the air or global city" (Duffer 10). For example, in this article called " Paris bans driving due to smog " by Robert Duffer, on monday motorist with even numbered license plates were told to leave their cars at home or suffer a 22 euro fine which turns out to be $31 U.S. Dollars. And then the same thing would happen to those whose license plates ended in an odd number the following day. This had to have cut pollution a huge amount. If you think about how many people are living in Paris, and you think about them all staying off the road due to a ban then you may be able to understand the amount of pollution that wasn't produced during this ban. Now Paris, did this for the advantage purpose of reducing the amount of pollution they had in their air and by not adding more to it. It couldn't have a negative impact they were doing something good for the enviornment even if it didn't really help that much. Out of the whole city of Paris about "4,000 drivers were fined," and "27 people had their cars impounded for their reaction to the fine" (Duffer 12). Another advantage that Paris had due to them banning car usage was that "Congestion was down 60 percent" (Duffer 14). The ruling French lifted the ban when the smog cleared up enough. Bogota, Columbia turned what they did as a tradition, into a big hit to tons of poeple in other countries. " Car-free day is spinning into a big hit in Bogota " by Andrew Selsky informed the public about what was started a few years ago back in Columbia. For a day cars except for buses and taxis were banned. In the city of "7 million, the goal is to promote alternative transportation and also reduce smog. Violators faced $25 fines." (Selsky 21) Due the day without cars, the city of Bogotas has "118 MILES of bicycle paths, the most of any Latin American City." (Selsky 27) One advantage they had was that because of the day with out cars the parks and sports centers have been in the best shape they could possibly be in. They also did have to reduced the amount of pollution that was being put into the air, because it was such a big hit to other cities and countries. Yet another article by Elisabeth Rosenthal called " The End of Car Culture ", is stating the advantages in the United States and what has happened with the reducing of cars. "Recent studies suggest that Americans are buying fewer cars, driving less and getting fewer licenses as each year goes by." (Rosenthal 29) The minimizing of cars in The U.S. has some advantages those being, "Obama's ambitious goals to curb the United States' greenhouse gas emissions" (Rosenthal 29). New York City for example is home to the heart of public transportation due to all the taxis and the subway. Not many people in New York city drive or even own a car due to the congested streets, and the ridiculous amount of money you have to have just to park it like it was in Germany. Crazy amounts of money to park a car is just an outrage. The advantage here would be the money saved by not even owning a car and storing it. Another one would be the traffic is bad but not as bad as it would be if more people had cars. Public transportation is huge in New York. It's already expensive enough to live in New York imagine if there werent as many taxis and if the subway wasn't there at all. Picture all the pollution there would be. To wrap up everything, as stated there are many advantages to reducing car usage all around the world. If it was to reduce smog or pollution of just to save money they are still advantages to decreasing the amount of times you use a car. If something is in walking distances why not just walk instead of taking a car and wasting money and also polluting the air (unless it's a hybrid). The limiting of car usage is slowly but surely growing all over the world. Yes, cars are faster to get places, but why waste the money and clean air to be somewhere quickly? Think of all the advantages there are in reducing car usage not the disadvantages.  

Do i think the technology is a good value . Yes the use of technology to read a students emotional expression in a classroom to me is valuable in my opinion . For expample in paragraph 6 it say that '' a computer can recongnize when a student is confused or bored'' so why not use the technology to tell if the student is sad or happy to cheer them up or to keep them happy. Lastly i do think the invention made by Dr. Huang should go further because it will have good use all over the world . Why, because i blieve it's a quicker way of seeing how someone day is going or how they feel. This technology can be very useful because in pargraph 6 again tells the reader how it's not only used to look at students to see their emotion it's also used for video games or video surgery . Finally the use of the figuring out students emotional expression is a good idea because to me its a better use of just asking someone how they are feeling thats why the'' Facial Action Coding System '' comes in handy because people in general or friends may have trouble describing someones facial traits .

How safe would you feel if you there was a car driveing itself beside you? I am against the use of driverless cars. There are quite a few reasons why I am. These reasons are that people will abuse this technolgy, it might not be the most reliable way to get around, and people would be more likely to fall asleep at the wheel. My first reason is that people will abuse this thecnolgy. If you look at people now who text and drive and do other things that they arent soppoust to they will be more likely to do it in a driverless car thinking that the car will do everything for them. As it says in paragraph two in this article that the car would show a message when the person needed to take over the wheel but if they are texting or doing something else that they shouldent be doing. Another is that they would be more likely to fall asleep witch is true because some people fall asleep while actually in controll of the car so taking away the abilty to controll the car would make it much easier of them to fall asleep. Its also not the most reliable way to get around because what if the computer and sensors randomly short out or they mess up and send the car into a telephone pole, tree, ect. I think that driverless cars are a bad idea because people will become more tired at the wheel, its not reliable, and people are going to do stuff that they shouldent and its gonna eighter cause them or someone else to get killed. This tecnolgy seems like a good idea to a lot of peopel im sure but its not a good idea because it will end up causeing a lot more deaths i think jsut because people wont pay attention or fall asleep or the car itself will find a way to crash. I think that driverkess cars would be a bad thing overall.

Today, there are advance technology in the society such as computers, cars, cell phones, and etc but no one ever tried to develop an driverless cars. Today in our society, many people tried to develop new technologies because things are getting more advanced an effective. Driverless cars are one of their plan, where the cars has sensors and know what to do. I agree the development of driverless cars because the cars uses less fuel, less car accidents, and there is still alert in the car. The driverless cars should be develop and introduced to the soiety because the cars uses less fuel than the cars we used today. The text states, "The cars he foresees would use half the fuel of today's taxis." From this example we can tell that the cars is great because they used less fuel than the the cars we sued today. Thus, people do not have to worried about they will ran out the fuel when they're driving. Most of the people loved to use cars that used less fuels because they do not have to spend much money on the fuel. The text also states, "Offer far more flexibility than a bus." This example shows that the driverless cars have more rooms than a bus. People to sit in a place where there is not croweded because it's comfortable. Driverless cars solved the overcroweded the problem because it got more spaces. Thus, I agree the development of the cars. While the driverless cars used less fuel, the cars can drive million miles without a crash. The text states, "Their cars have driven more than half million miles without a crush." This example tells us that the car is safer than the cars we drive today. If a car can drive million miles without any crashing then we considered it's an great car because most of the cars were not safe and it gets into car accident very often. The most important is that there are still alert in the car. The text states, "...Google cars aren't truly driverless; they still alert the driver to take over when pulling in and out of hallways." This example shows that when there is something happened to the car, the cars will alert the driver that there is something going on but most of the cars do not have that kind of technique. Second, the text states, "Dealing with comlicated traffic issues, such as navigating through roadwork or accidents." This example shows that when there is an major accidents or traffic issues then the car will alert you to move out the car quickly before anything happened. In other hand, people disagree to develop the driverless cars. The text states, "Why would anyone want a driverless cars that still needs a driver?" They claimed that the driverless cars should do everything by itself instead having the dirver controlling it. They think there is no difference if we use a normal car. I disagree with them because it's safer if we have a real driver in the car, they'll prevent anything bad happened. Driverless cars can have more advanced technique in the future when there are more people supporting it. Thus, we should not give up on developing the cars because the cars uses less fuel, less car accidents, and there are still alert in the car that helped people to know what happened.

As our world continues to develop into a more technology dependable world we are always looking for a way for make life easier and simply. During our time on planet Earth we have created amazing inventions such as the phone, car, plane, and other marvelous projects that better our world. Now in our current generation we are looking for ways to improve what past generations inventions and make life easier for future generations. One way people are looking to improve past generation's inventions is through creating driverless cars. Even though driverless cars seem like a great idea they will bring a negative impact towards the world through increasing the number of deaths and injuries, and creating conflict between manufactures and drivers. When a human is driving a car they know their surroundings and they're able to make a quick decision in small ammount of time. If driverless cars were to be released into our society they would be covered with sensors and cameras all over the car. When you get into a driverless car you are putting your life in the hands of a piece of technology that is capable of malfunctioning and killing you. Already in 3 states and Washington D.C. it is illegal to test computer-driven cars. Those states are taking precautionary measures to make sure that people safe and avoid unecessary death. These driverless cars could increase the number of deaths and injuries significantly causing an uproar in the society where huge riots and protests could outbreak. Even though buses, taxis, and other forms of public transportation are hurting the Earth significantly,people are safe. If driverless cars were to become popular amongst our society all the car companies would try and develop the best and safest driverless car possible. However, those car companies already get our money when we buy regular cars that sometimes have malfunctions that lead to death. These deaths could spark a huge disagreement on whether to blame the driver or manufacturer. In my opinion I would blame the manufacturer because they are the ones that made a "driverless car" key word driverless meaning there no driver required. In order for driverless cars to be safe they have to win the trust of the people and if driveless cars cause a ton of deaths and injuries people will have no faith in driverless cars. Overall our world has developed into a world that needs technology in order to function. Previous generations were able to create inventions that we still use today such as phones, and cars, but driverless cars are not the next step in our technology based world because they will cause way more negatives than positives.

The author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. It is important to study Venus because it is simular to Earth. It is closest to Earth by density and size. It is difficult to study because it is super hot. NASA is working on a plan to find out more about and explore Venus. Venus is simular to Earth because they have streams like we do on Earth. They also have said there is a chance of life up there. Long ago Venus was probably covered with oceans. Venus has many things like Earth. They still have rocky surfaces and mountains and craters. Venus is also are nearest option for a planitary visit. It is dangerous to be on Venus because it is so hot. Temperatures can average over 800 degrees fahrenheit and the atmospheric oressure is 90 times greater than what we experience. They could have erupting volcanoes and extreme weather. Another thing they could have is super powerful earthquakes and frequent lightning. They have a super thick atmosphere which could be dangerous to get to. NASA is trying to find out things about Venus, so we can get new things to possibly go there in the future. NASA is trying to find something that can withstand the heat of it and stay there for a few hours. They could study the life there and find out about it. They want to get close and they think machines will help them do that. The author supports the idea that studying Venus is worthy pursuit despite the dangers. Venus is simular to Earth. Venus once had oceans like the Earth does now. NASA and scientists are looking into possible ways to explore Venus. This exploration will help find new facts about Venus.

I don't think driverless cars should happen. I could see that having a lot of problems with driverless cars. I can only see it being good for two reasons. I can see a lot of people not listenig to the rules like keeping your eyes on the road. I can see more people looking away and going on phones. With cars now, people look and text on their phones, which they should't be,but I can see more people looking on their phones with driverless car. The driverless car can have many problems with it not working corretly. And if the car does fail their are gonna be many problems to figure out who's fault it is. In the article it says, "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault-the driver or the manufacture?" The only thing I can see it good for would be for drunk drivers, it would still be illegal but it would be safer. I think it would be better to have drivers driving the car then to have driverless cars. It would be safer to have a driver driving the car. Their wouldn't be new laws. Not as many cases of who's fault it is.

The Eletoral College should stay because this has been the system that has been used for years in the united states and i dont think that it would be respectful to the ones that have been choosen by this system. Most of the people who dont like this system of voting will most likely say that we the people dont really know any thing about who we are voting and that most of us who are voting for someone are just voting for them just because we have heard good thinds about them. I'm not going to lie and say that none of the people who do get to vote are all voting because they know their stuff about the candidates, but some of us who do know about the candidates and how they are working should not lose the right to vote for who ever we would like. If we dont get to vote for who we like and believe is better then what type of country are we. If all of the states would have same electoral vote then things would be harder because we mostly at some point will have a tie this would cause major problems but since every state has a different number it is not likely that both candidates will end up with the same number of votes. Another reason people dont like this system is because most states have a winner takes all system where they dont spilt up the elector votes if most of the votes are for one candidate then he will get all of the votes from that state. This causes lots of people to rage on the Electoral college because they feel that the state is taking there right to vote and to be different. The other good thing about Eletoral college is that no certain region can win a election so this makes candidates campaign in states that they no they can win. This also is something that people do not like because for example when the canidates were Obama and Romney and lets say he put alot of his campaigns in new york this would cause the new yorkers who are going with Obama to get mad and start to protest because they arent see anything from Obama so they might turn to the next candidate. This actually helps because when people favor someone this makes it even harder for a tie to happen in the election. Many of the people who are going agaist say that we are not voting for a president that we are voting for a slate of electors. This is true but if we are voting for electors that are going to vote for the president that we would like its  just like voting for the president there is not difference. Some people who are going agaist Elector college use this to trick people and make them go agaist it but if you know about Elector College this wont happen. Elector College should not be taken away in any matter because this is the easiest, best, and oldest way that we have of picking the new leaders for our country.           

Dear mister senator, The Electoral College is a very organized way of handling the Presidential election. It makes certain that tthere is usually a landslide victory. The locations of the states help the canidates and the Electoral Colloege states that you have to have transregional appeal. The swing states such as Florida, are the states presidental canidates pay attention to. The votes there are the ones thats can decide the election. The lager states, due to there large population, also get more Electoral votes. The Electoral Colloege has helped avioded run-off elections by reducing the complication of it all. The Electoral College is made up of five-hundred thirty-eight electors and all that is need to elect a president is two-hundred seventy electoral votes. The electoral College is the easier and less complicated way of electing a president. Though whether the Electoral College is democratic, it is not true in a modern sense. It is still very practical and less complicated. The people instead would vote for slates of electors but, they still would be voting towards you canidate. The Electoral College is the method that we should keep.

Why others should become a Seagoing Cowboy. If you become a Seagoing Cowboy you would have a lot of fun exploring and touring places. others should participate in the Seagoing Cowboys because you could go to many unique places. They could go on adventures and explore them if they participated in the Seagoing Cowboys. Luke also toured an excavated castle crete and marveled. If you go to the Seagoing cowboy program you would have a lot of fun being there, because you can tour places go places you never been and do interesting things there. Going on adventures would be the best thing for some people in history that haven't ever went on a trip before. Here are some reasons why you should join the Seagoing Cowboys program. Having fun and touring places would be the best thing ever. Joining the Seagoing Cowboys program would be a good thing to do.

The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it has due to many reason many reason. One of the reason why is because the Venus is referred as Earth twin since it the closest planet to Earth in the Solar sytem. Another reason is that Venus might have been the most Earth-like planet. Therefore Venus is a great planet for the human which will one day could live if study well and successfully. Venus was often referred as the Earth twin due it similar with the Earth and it likeness with the Earth.Through the author suggest to study Venus since it's very dangerous like it say in passage 3 "On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degress Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greather than anything humans encounter on Earth" saying that it very hot due the increase of 800 degrees and 90 time greater of pressure on earth which make it harder for astronomers to land it and study it. Due that since you can't really study Venus from the distance. Furthermore the author beileve it important to the Venus and study it. If studying Venus success it would be very worthy even after all the hardship that would have awhile trying to study it. Since Venus have been earth-like planet meaning if we study and learn about it there might a chance of living there and most of the problem on earth would be solve which can lead to human succes as. In conlusion the author believe studying Venus is worthy even thought there are many hardship and that it would lead to better life and change in human kind due the Venus, planet which was once have life and features that are analogous to on Earth.

As I read this article about Driverless Cars, my mind wonders to a whole lot of problems. Although right now I am not directly affected by this because I have yet to get my license, I dont find the driverless car project as a good idea. The first thing that comes to my mind when I think of a Driverless car taxi system is a limited budget which means a limited amount of driverless cars. Also, how much would these cars cost? In paragraph 10 it states the vehicle makers "Tesla, Mercades- Benz, Audi, and Nissan". These car companies already sell higher end regular cars at high prices, let alone a so called Driverless Car. A big position on my behalf of Driverless Cars would also be safety. As stated in paragraph 9, "If the technology fails and someone is injured, who is at fault - the driver or the manufacturer?". Everyday technology fails in some way, shape or form and people in turn get hurt, injured and sometimes killed. My question to myself that I am pondering would be, "how safe is it to step into these Driverless cars and be able to trust that something won't go wrong?" For decades now, people have had to learn how to drive. Some would even say that there is a thrill that comes from driving and that it keeps your mind alert. So what is the point of a Driverless Car? In paragraph 8 it says "wouldnt drivers get bored waiting for their turn to drive?" This statement tells me that humans like to drive and that in a car where we wouldn't need to be alert or wouldn't need to do anything, we would get bored. So when I asked "What is the point of a Driverless Car?" I believe the answer would be that the human species is lazy and a Driverless Car would mean less work and more relaxation. In the end, I do not see a time in the future where there is no need to buy a car anymore. Driverless Cars and our roads would need a lot of work before it could be anywhere near possible to have a car drive itself by 2020.

I'm against the value of using this technology to read the emotional expressions on students becuse by being able to detect exactly how other peole are feeling even when they are trying to hide thier emotions. That new technology for that software would be wasted the people in this world don't care about how they fell.Like last year i read science found out why people get mad for the littiest and the dumest thing in the world it becuse peolpe got no real probles to be mad about to me it look like people get dumer every year. Becuse how people be do the dumest thing by just wanting people to look what they are doing then they do the same so back to the technology that make you see emotions it sound like good idea and people well see it on the news but the nology would be still be wasted people will start to care but later on no wouldn't care like all ways all so becuse of that you would loose money and time.So all that work will be for nothing.

In modern society people tend to be scared to voice their opinions, espescially students. With pressure of teachers, deans, and other peers most students would rather keep their hand down if something they disliked arises. If schools incorperated this software, invented by professor Huang and Sebe, then schools would get immediate feedback on how students felt about classes, teachers, homework, and school as a whole. Prof. Thomas Huang and Prof. Nicu Sebe have worked together to invent a software that is one of a kind. This software constructs a 3-D computer model of a face, and calculates the movement of 44 major muscles in the model to determine their emotion. If this solftware could somehow be applied to school computers and labtops the results would be amazing. A school board would know if students enjoyed school computers, or enjoyed a new software they were trying out. Teachers could understand if students were getting the current lesson. These are all examples of topics that students feel pressured to speak out on, and without them speaking one word a teacher or school board would understand how they felt about it. Being able to detect the emotions of students could enhance the school experience by a jurastic difference. Since students in modern society are taught to be quite and listen to the teacher teach, this emotion detecting software by Prof. Thomas Huang and Prof. Nicu Sebe could be the next improvement of schools.

The Electoral College should be abolished. It is "unfair, outdated, and irrational". It just makes so much more sense to go with the popular vote from everyone. Even Bob Dole agreed to this and said "Abolish the Electoral College!" Most people just despise it anyways, let's just get rid of it already. Let's face it, if you have a vote, it would go to the slate of electors who in turn, vote for the president. The worst thing about it is that sometimes they can't even control their own vote. What use is that? It doesn't make sense if they can't even control something that they have such as a vote. Also some voters get confused and don't know what to vote for though. Instead, they can vote for the wrong candidate. This is why we should get rid of the Electoral College. It's just so unfair to other voters that they can't have their way because the others get confused. This can let to political disasters and events that will make people riot over a mistake that they made. They need to learn that the Electoral College needs to go. First off, the founding fathers established the Electoral College in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens. It was was founded all the way back then, it must surley be outdated and we should really try to go by our modern intelligent ways now. They believed the "winner takes all" system that just doesn't make sense anymore if you can just vote on your own and when the President wins, it will just be the popular vote from overall everyone. Secondly, the people in Congress are well educated indeed, but do we really need their seperate votes? Can we just skip that? We are already getting the "popular vote of qualified citizens" (which is good). All these electors are just so unneccesary when it comes down to it. I understand only a few people still want the Elelctoral College in place, but in all honesty, it is only what they have been taught and they think it is the right thing. There are "538" electors in the Electoral College and they need a mojority of "270" electoral votes. This seems far too complicated just for voting on a President. All we need is the popular vote. There has even been a case in the 2000's that is called "Disaster Factor". Americans are even lucky that this event isn't the most that can potentially happen with the Electoral College in place. We should avoid this political disaster at all costs! In the end,  we should all finally understand that the Electoral College is outdated, unfair, and irrational. It was made long, long ago and we have a better way to vote other than dealing with the mess of electors getting confused and the people in Congress dealing with it all together. Just go by the popular vote from the people and we would be good to go. Better modern than old fashioned, right?

The world is filled different types of technology. Apple, a major technology industry, has invented multiple types of phones, computers, watches, and televisons. Computers have evolved within the last five years and the have made a whole new world. The use of technology to read students' emotional expression is valuable because it is able to detect if a student is confused and it can track emotional-recognition. While in school, most students do not like raising their hand or asking any questions if they are lost during a lesson because they may feel embarrassed or scared. For example in paragraph six, Dr. Huang predicts, "A classroom computer could recgonize when a student is becoming confused or bored." He aslo predicts, "Then it could modify the lesson, like an effective human instructor." Furtherore, Dr. Huang states, "Most human communication is nonverbal, including emotional communication." With the classroom computer, students may feel more comfortable and more confident in themselves because they would have the ability to learn one-on-one with an instructor to get the help they need without feeling embarrassed. In addition, the computer with be able to track emotional-recognition. Computers that have the ability to track emotions would benefit everyone. In paragraph five it states, "Yet Dr. Huang observes that artists such as da Vini studied human anatomy to help them paint facial muscles preciesly enough to convey specific emotions. His new computer software stores similar anatomical information as electronic code." Furthermore, in paragraph six it states, "Imagine a computer that knows when you are happy or sad. For example, if you smile when a Web ad appears on your screen, a similar ad might follow. But if you frown, the next ad with be different." Emotional-recognition could improve how people are feeling and help them get through the day. In contrast, a computer that can detect emotion could not work well with some people. In paragraph six it states, "Imagine a computer that knows when you are happy or sad." Also, in paragraph two it states, "And how can a computer recognize the subtle facial movements we humans use to express how we feel?" People might not like the idea of their computer knowing how they are feeling because if the computer gives them false feedback, they might not agree with the new software. In addition, people might pay money for a software that does not give them the correct emotion or the software might not work in general. The use of technology has definetly taken over the world. With the new computer software, it is able to read how each student is feelings and how it can track the emotions of everyday people. Applying emotions like happiness, sadness, fear, disgust, and surprise could change the face of technology.

Yes, the use of this technology to read the emotional expressions of students in a classroom is valuable, because many student will come into the classroom with sad face and nobody will know what is wrong with them but with the Facial Action Coding System, everybody will know what is wrong with a person if he/she is sad in class, And is not everybody that feel happy everyday but with this kind of technology we will be able to know what is wrong with them and we will make sure they feel happy. In paragraph 5 the author say that in fact, we humans perform this same impressive "caculation" everyday. For instance, you can probably tell how your friend is feeling simply by the look on her face. But some people can tell how a person feel but only the person friend and that is not good but with the Facial Action Coding System evrybody will be able to tell how a person feel not only the person friend. In paragraph 6 it say that a classroom computer could recognize when a student is becoming confused or bored and that will make the teacher find something that will u feel happy and keep u busy. But without the Facial Action Coding System the teacher will not be able to know what is wrong with a student is either they are confused or bored she won't be able to tell becuase she can't know how the student feel but with the computer the teacher can see if the students are happy or not and they are not happy she will be able to find a way to make them happy. So the Facial Action Coding System will be valuable in classroom so the teacher can know the feeling of his student.

I think that they should not change the Electoral College because it tells us what kind of president we will have in the future and what kind of changes he will make. The Electoral College consists of 538 electors and a majority of 270 electoral votes is required to elect the president. You see this is something that happened a long time ago the founding fathers established it in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens. This is a system that makes sure that we know what kind of president we are putting in the white house and what are things to make this state a better state to live in and to have a good job. Under the 23rd Amendment of the Constitution, the district of Columbia is allocated 3 electors and treated like a state for purpose of the Electoral College. The electors are generally chosen by the candidates political party, but state laws vary on how the electors are selected and what their responsibilities are. The president only haves four years, it is held every four years on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. When you vote for your state they have a thing called winner-take-all system that awards all electors to the winning presidential candidate. However, Maine and Nebraska each have a variation of proportional representation. When the election is done they have a thing they do called Certificated of Ascertainment it lists all of the candidates who ran for president in your state along with the names of their respective electors. The Ascertainments are then sent to the Congress and then to the National Archives as part of the official records of the presidential election. In the article of The Indefensible Electoral College its trying to ask you why even the best laid defenses of the system are wrong and it tells you why. What have Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Bob Dole, the U.S. chamber of commerce, and the AFL-CIO all, in their time, agreed on? They were trying to abolishing the electoral college and they were not alone, according to a Gallup poll in 2000, taken shortly after Al Gore thanks to the quirks of the electoral college won thwe popular vote but lost the presidency, over 60 percent of voters would prefer a direct election to the kind we have now. This is the thing that can not be changed because this is a system that we can pull up see what they were elected for and why they were voted president and how many times. It helps us how we can choose the right president or the right vice president. In 1960 in Hawaii, Vice President Richard Nixon, who was president over the senate, validated only his opponents electors, but he made sure to do so without establishing a precedent. This happened a long time before i was born. You see only one state can casts only one vote in Wyoming,representing 500,000 voters, would have as much say as the 55 representatives from California,who represent 35 million voters. In 1968,a shift of just 41,971 votes would have deadlocked the election;in 1976, a tie would have occurred if a mere 5,559 voters on Ohio and 3,687 voters in Hawaii had voted the other way. In a article i read it says that there are five reasons to keep our despised method of choosing the president. There are called Certainty of Outcome,Everyones President,Swing States,Big States, and the final one is Avoid Run-Off Elections. Each one tells us how choosing the president and shows us a map how it works and we can see which state shows a breakdown of the number of electoral votes given to each state. This is something that can help us understand how to vote and how long they will be the president or the vice president i think that we should not change the Electoral College because how would it work without it and how would we pick the next president. This is a hard thing because it would take time to discusses it with the senators and it would take a lot of votes to agree or disagree to the idea. This is why i think that they should not change this because its been around longer before i was born.