Because the wide availability of technological developments has been paving the way for significant changes in work, there is a common belief that such advancements of technology are totally beneficial to the public. From my perspective, I am strongly convinced that the advent of technological advances has genuinely been adjusting how work is done but it is relatively absurd to state that technological advancements are completely helpful for all society.
On the one hand, the omnipresence of technological advancements could pave the way for the more innovative and active trend in work. To specify, several genres of workers could recently get done their work at home due to the support of digitized materials such as video conferencing in the context of the exponentially increasing cost of not only fossil fuel in private vehicles but also property bills. Moreover, manual jobs have increasingly been replaced with work characterized by automatic systems. For example, watering in agriculture is now not significantly assisted by individual labour capacity,but by sophisticated irrigation systems, which seems to considerably enhance productivity of several related work.
However, I am strongly convinced that it would be too unreasonable that all society would reap benefits from this wide availability of technological developments. In fact, undeveloped countries could not take advantage of advanced technologies at the utmost. To be more specific, those whose governments are in need to cope with several disturbing challenges such as illiteracy, poverty and civil wars, especially the ones of Africa. As a result, those issues could hinder the public from optimizing the use of technological advancements as well as stabilizing state-of-the-art systems due to relatively insurmountable difficulties regarding knowledge and human repertoires. On top of that, society significantly contributed by a vast majority of manual workers who are modestly aware of technological knowledge could encounter a lot of difficulty in dealing with the advancements of technology. In fact, systematizing technologies on a massive scale could be the breeding ground for the restriction of job vacancies, which would force a huge part of the workforce to the verge of joblessness due to inadequate approaches by the leaders.
In conclusion, cutting-edge technologies have gradually been producing many changes in how work is done. However, it seems to be hardly possible to conclude that the increasing range of modern technology could be of tremendous benefit to all society due to several related issues presented above.
- Some people think the government funding should not beused for supporting art and culture while others think supportingcultural activities may be beneficial for the population and theculture Discuss both these views and give your own opinion 89
- Maintaining public libraries is a waste of money since computer technology is now replacing their functions To what extend do you agree or disagree 84
- The chart below shows the average cost of the monthly contract for four di erent mobiles cell phones in a European country from January to September 2002 measured in euro 78
- Some people believe that people have the right to university education and government should make it free no matter what their financial background To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- Some people believe that modern high technology is transforming the way we work and is benefit to all of society To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 604, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , but
...y assisted by individual labour capacity,but by sophisticated irrigation systems, wh...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, moreover, regarding, so, well, for example, in conclusion, in fact, such as, as a result, as well as, on top of that
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 13.1623246493 137% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 66.0 41.998997996 157% => 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: 2226.0 1615.20841683 138% => OK
No of words: 396.0 315.596192385 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.62121212121 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46091344257 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.45130614858 2.80592935109 123% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 176.041082164 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.54797979798 0.561755894193 98% => OK
syllable_count: 728.1 506.74238477 144% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 20.2975951904 138% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 56.7908802682 49.4020404114 115% => OK
Chars per sentence: 159.0 106.682146367 149% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.2857142857 20.7667163134 136% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0 7.06120827912 142% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.153917166036 0.244688304435 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0602423034711 0.084324248473 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0414151247424 0.0667982634062 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109848287831 0.151304729494 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0309242590126 0.056905535591 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.2 13.0946893788 147% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 26.14 50.2224549098 52% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 14.6 7.44779559118 196% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 11.3001002004 147% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.61 12.4159519038 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.17 8.58950901804 118% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 78.4519038076 164% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.0 9.78957915832 174% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.1190380762 130% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => 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.