It has been debated that the technological advances in the past were more beneficial for the common man as compared to the development of technology in the recent decade. I certainly disagree with the above notion and hold an opinion that the benefits from the earlier achievements in technology were limited only to rich people, whereas with the recent advancements in science and technology, everyone can benefit from these advances.
The initial milestones in research and technology helped people to understand the significance of technology and its need for their future. However, the cost incurred to procure these benefits from technology was very high, that’s why, ordinary people were not able to afford the perks from technology, and it was limited to high profile business tycoons, politicians, and government officials. For instance, when mobile phones were invented in the early 19th century, very few individuals were able to afford them because of its high cost. The common man could not see these devices in their daily lives.
On the contrary, the recent developments in the field of technology are seen as a game-changer for the common man. Scientists and researchers are intended to make the use of technology affordable for every group of society, by adopting new approaches, like cost-effective methods, the cost of production has been reduced substantially. For example, in the last two decades, the cost of the internet, second generation, was significantly higher, and with the introduction of the latest fourth-generation technology, everyone across the globe can afford the internet. The above reasons signify that in the last decade, technology has completely changed the lives of humankind by making it better.
To conclude, many people argue that the developments in the field of technology were more beneficial for people in the past, however, I completely disagree with this statement and believe that, earlier, the perks from technical devices were not affordable by everyone, and the latest developments in technology have made it possible for an ordinary man to get benefit from these advances.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, second, so, whereas, for example, for instance, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 41.998997996 129% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1810.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 336.0 315.596192385 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3869047619 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28139028586 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0201045919 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 176.041082164 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.561755894193 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 581.4 506.74238477 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 8.0 2.52805611222 316% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 16.0721442886 68% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 30.0 20.2975951904 148% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 86.2937516292 49.4020404114 175% => OK
Chars per sentence: 164.545454545 106.682146367 154% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.5454545455 20.7667163134 147% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.90909090909 7.06120827912 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.250152366614 0.244688304435 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107940618702 0.084324248473 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0848095560813 0.0667982634062 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.174638860743 0.151304729494 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0564094927989 0.056905535591 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.2 13.0946893788 147% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.57 50.2224549098 65% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 11.3001002004 143% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.57 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 9.78957915832 163% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 10.1190380762 138% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.7795591182 148% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.