Some people think that robots are very important to human's future development, while others believe they are dangerous and negatively affect society. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
How robots can affect our future lives? Will they play an influential role in human success? Or conversely, will they be perilous for us? These are the questions that many have been bombarded with in recent years. Although it is stringently postulated by some that robots will be more intelligent, enabling them to ruin humans, it will be proven by this essay that this may not be the case. In other words, these machines will be capable of precisely doing arduous tasks, expediting our progress in different aspects. Throughout the following paragraphs, these points will be meticulously scrutinized to rationally advocate the latter logical standpoint.
It is opined that people endeavour to design robots that are going to be amazingly smart, leading them to program themselves, on the one hand. By doing this, robotic designers will not be able to take them under control; as a result, they may hurt even their creatures. Take two robots in Facebook Company, as an illustration. They started creating their own language that even prominent engineers could not decode it. Since it was dangerous for the company, they decided to shut them down. It is exemplified by this example that the more intelligent the robots, the more uncontrollable they may be, jeopardizing human life. This viewpoint is refuted by this essay.
Robots, on the other hand, will outperform humans in fields owing to their high accuracy and speed, tremendously contributing to our future development. BMW Company has reaped the benefits of robots to speed up the process of car manufacturing with an increase in precision, resulting in high sales, to illustrate. If they had not utilized this recent method, never would they have been able to increase their profit margins. By shedding light on this example, it is, therefore, crystal clear that robots, without a shadow of a doubt, will considerably thrive in a plethora of domains due to their efficient performance.
To recapitulate, after a careful situational analysis of robotics’ beneficial effects on human life, considering this recent technology as a negative one is completely superficial. Based on the aforementioned compelling ground, it is, hence, hoped these points of paramount significance will be taken into account by people the world over.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, hence, if, may, so, therefore, as a result, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 13.1623246493 167% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 7.85571142285 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 2.0 10.4138276553 19% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 51.0 24.0651302605 212% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 54.0 41.998997996 129% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1932.0 1615.20841683 120% => OK
No of words: 368.0 315.596192385 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37987740619 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94344534694 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 176.041082164 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.58152173913 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 597.6 506.74238477 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 5.43587174349 221% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 4.76152304609 252% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 16.0721442886 124% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.7419340195 49.4020404114 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.6 106.682146367 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4 20.7667163134 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.7 7.06120827912 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.131562562349 0.244688304435 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0453336952964 0.084324248473 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0342937278823 0.0667982634062 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0826790727797 0.151304729494 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0113640359069 0.056905535591 20% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 13.0946893788 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 50.2224549098 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.4159519038 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.51 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 116.0 78.4519038076 148% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.