In the modern world, it is possible to shop, work and communicate with people via the internet and live without any face-to-face contact with others. Is it a positive or negative development?
Nowadays, people have been using the internet into every aspect of life such as shopping, working and communication. Therefore, the number of face-to-face interactions among residents can decrease. In my view, the internet can make modern life more convenient in some ways, and I believe that this trend is a positive advancement.
On the one hand, the internet has really made communication easier. First of all, it deletes the concept of geographical distance. Instead of having to gather one place to direct contact, people can talk together at any time and anywhere in the world. Secondly, most of the companies have been applying the internet in their workplace. This helps boost their employees work productivity and reduce expenses like commuting costs, printed documents. In the economic context, inhabitants more and more tend to use the internet to make online buying activities due to the convenience it brings. Take the North American as an example, about 70% of the population in there shopping online in 2017. In addition, purchasing through the internet also encourages people spending more thereby promoting economic growth. According to Ecommerce Foundation's Global Ecommerce Report in 2017. If in 2014, on average, global shoppers spent only US $ 1,228 per year on e-commerce sites, by 2017 this number had grown to US $ 1,425 on average per year, increased by 7.4% compared to 2016.
However, going along with the benefits of the internet are its negative effects that we need to consider. We are losing face to face interactions that are deemed extremely important in this technological era. Children hardly spend time talking to their parents because they are very busy to surf Facebook and virtual relationships. Today, we can easily see the image of young people plugging their face into their phones to surf Facebook or selfies posted on Twitter with tremendous frequency instead of having conversations as they did before the advent of smart devices. As a result, this trend will turn people into insensitive people with real-life relationships.
In conclusion, the influence of the internet on many aspects of our lives is remarkable. Although it is inflicting serve damage to our relationships, the benefits that it generates being enormous profits for the society and economy of a country.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-26 | minhphambinh1234 | 89 | view |
| 2023-06-02 | Trương Bảo Kiên | 67 | view |
| 2023-04-18 | minhnhat2002 | 73 | view |
| 2023-04-11 | cinderel | 73 | view |
| 2023-03-12 | ophongcute@gmail.com | 89 | view |
- The pie chart below shows information about where coffee is produced consumed and where is profit goes 89
- The world of work is rapidly changing and employees cannot depend on having the same job or the same working conditions for life Why is it the case Can you suggest some ways to prepare people to work in the future 95
- The line graph below shows the oil production and consumption in China between 1982 and 2006 78
- The table below gives information about the population in Australia and Malaysia in 1980 and 2002 78
- How often do you change your car and What car do you buy 92
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 932, Rule ID: CURRENCY_SPACE[1]
Message: The currency mark is usually written without any whitespace: '$1'.
Suggestion: $1
... average, global shoppers spent only US $ 1,228 per year on e-commerce sites, by 20...
^^^
Line 3, column 1006, Rule ID: CURRENCY_SPACE[1]
Message: The currency mark is usually written without any whitespace: '$1'.
Suggestion: $1
...es, by 2017 this number had grown to US $ 1,425 on average per year, increased by 7...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, really, second, secondly, so, therefore, in addition, in conclusion, such as, as a result, first of all, in my view
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 24.0651302605 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 62.0 41.998997996 148% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1954.0 1615.20841683 121% => OK
No of words: 371.0 315.596192385 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26684636119 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38877662729 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87687673104 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 176.041082164 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.611859838275 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 613.8 506.74238477 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.76152304609 210% => 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: 42.2337246759 49.4020404114 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.7 106.682146367 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.55 20.7667163134 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.05 7.06120827912 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => 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: 8.0 3.4128256513 234% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.247652833702 0.244688304435 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0622713168446 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0490386476302 0.0667982634062 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126858633421 0.151304729494 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0577743426169 0.056905535591 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 13.0946893788 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.29 12.4159519038 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.08 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 78.4519038076 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.