1. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/oct/04/great-pacific-garbage-patch-ocean-plastic-trash 'Great Pacific garbage patch' far bigger than imagined, aerial survey shows
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/26/opinion/choking-the-oceans-with-plastic.html?_r=0
Choking the Oceans With Plastic
2. The Great Pacific Garbage Patch is a man caused cluster of trash, mainly plastic, that just floats as 1 lump sum of trash. It has been forming for around 6 years.
3. The articles are the same in the fact that they have the same intention of getting rid of the trash patch. However, the first article talks about the sheer size of the patch. The article explains that the path is much larger than they expected. It's so dense in trash that it's size is larger than they calculated. The second article talks about the stuff in the patch.
4. For the similar parts of the article, the author had similar views. They both wanted to stop the patch and get rid of it.
5. One detail that was present in one but not the other was the size of the ocean trash.
6. Obviously the ocean patch is something that needs to go. The amount of trash in it isn't good.
Monday, February 13, 2017
Monday, January 23, 2017
Autonomous Cars TASK 1/23/17
1. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/20/technology/self-driving-cars-guidelines.html?_r=0 | Self-Driving Cars Gain Powerful Ally: The Government
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/602196/2021-may-be-the-year-of-the-fully-autonomous-car/ | Robotics
2021 May Be the Year of the Fully Autonomous Car
2. An autonomous car is a car that can drive itself with little to no human interaction. Several corporations such as Uber are currently developing these cars. Some of the advantages of an autonomous car is that it can drive people without human aide, making it easier and more efficient for people. A disadvantage for the cars is their sense of awareness. Since these machines can't fully think for themselves, how will they react in unsafe situations.
3. The main difference between the two articles is that the second articles advocates for them in the future, while the first article says that they are a technology that should be overlooked for a while.
4. The author's views were conflicting in that the first article was a little bit skeptical. They did list the advantages of them so the author isn't fully against them. The second article, however, is fully confident in their use in the near future. This is seen by the article's title stating that they could become available by 2021.
5. One detail present in one but not the other was the fact of the U.S. government's intervention of the cars in the first article. With this detail in the second article, the meaning would barely change.
6. After reading both articles, I feel that they are something beneficial, however, they should be closely monitored until we know their full capabilities.
Monday, January 9, 2017
TASK - Gigafactory
1. https://electrek.co/2017/01/08/tesla-gigafactory-2-french-minister/ The race to get ‘Tesla Gigafactory 2’ heats up, French Minister visits Fremont factory
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-04/tesla-flips-the-switch-on-the-gigafactory
Tesla Flips the Switch on the Gigafactory
2. The Gigafactory is a new factory owned by Tesla that is being constructed to make lithium-ion battery cells.
3. The difference between the two articles is that the second article talks about the construction of the Gigafactory in Nevada while the first article talks about the construction of a similar factory in Europe. The first article also talks about some of the key features of the Gigafactory.
4. The author's views in both articles are similar in that both seem to be fond of the factory. Neither articles seem to think down upon the factory, especially the first article that plans on making another one in Europe.
5. The second article talks about the current advancement of the Gigafactory while the first doesn't. This simple detail wouldn't have much of an impact of the meaning of the first article because the nature of the article is different.
6. After reading both articles, I personally feel like the Gigafactory is a big advancement for people. This factory will allow their high-quality batteries to be made at a larger scale and possibly a cheaper cost. On a another economic perspective, the factory allows more jobs to be created. Any factory, whether near fully robotic or human made, creates several jobs.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-04/tesla-flips-the-switch-on-the-gigafactory
Tesla Flips the Switch on the Gigafactory
2. The Gigafactory is a new factory owned by Tesla that is being constructed to make lithium-ion battery cells.
3. The difference between the two articles is that the second article talks about the construction of the Gigafactory in Nevada while the first article talks about the construction of a similar factory in Europe. The first article also talks about some of the key features of the Gigafactory.
4. The author's views in both articles are similar in that both seem to be fond of the factory. Neither articles seem to think down upon the factory, especially the first article that plans on making another one in Europe.
5. The second article talks about the current advancement of the Gigafactory while the first doesn't. This simple detail wouldn't have much of an impact of the meaning of the first article because the nature of the article is different.
6. After reading both articles, I personally feel like the Gigafactory is a big advancement for people. This factory will allow their high-quality batteries to be made at a larger scale and possibly a cheaper cost. On a another economic perspective, the factory allows more jobs to be created. Any factory, whether near fully robotic or human made, creates several jobs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)