There are many eye-catching cities in my country. And one of them is my home city Semey. The town was founded in 1718 by merchants who built seven tents in an empty place. “Semipalatinsk” which in Russian language means “Seven tents” was the name for this place; afterward it was changed to “Semey”. Later, it became a big trade center, so this city has a great history. At the time when it was formed, the town was occupied mostly by intellectuals. Therefore, there are many museums, theaters and public libraries. And if I had a chance to be a representative of my city and present my city to a visitor, I would show everything I could.
First of all, I would take the visitor to our old gate, the entrance to the town, which was a part of the fortress in the past. The Gate was built in 1773 under the direction of an engineer-captain Andreev I.G. After 300 years the gate and the high-angle gun are the only things left in a modern city. The ball bullets, next to the gun, are packed together in the same position as it was 300 years ago. And I was always asking to myself “Did anyone ever shoot from this gun?” Well, I don’t think that it was simply to decorate the gates.
The next place which I would show to the visitor is our huge bridge. Since our town is divided by a wide river called “Irtish”, our modern construction joins together two separate lands. It was built in 2000 by Japanese IHI Corporation and Turkish Alarco Alsim company. It has the same design as The Golden Bridge in San Francisco, except the fact that our bridge is wider. In the one end of the bridge, there is an embankment which is always crowded with walking people. On the other end of the bridge, there is a big aqua-park which is always crowded with joyful children. Moreover, from this bridge, the island, where different types of animals collected from all over the world, could be seen. This beautiful sight is worth seeing.
Also the City History Museum would be very interesting to the visitor because he/she would be able to become familiar with a variety of traditional clothes, ceremonies and food. For example, "Nauryz" festival marks the first day of spring and the beginning of the new year. "Beshparmak" is a very popular dish which consists of boiled meat and small pieces of pastry. There is also a description of many traditional games, musical instruments, etc. And as a part of the tradition, it is obligatory to give the national clothing as a present for the guests, so the visitor would have a good memory about the visit and the city.
In conclusion, there are many captivating places in my town. If I had a chance to present my town for the visitor, I would need at least one year to show him/her all the engrossing sights.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Sunday, March 28, 2010
The issue of the ownership rules and copyright rules
The purpose of almost all the comercial companies is to profit from the demand of consumers. Whereas, the purpose of the consumer is to have more for less money. To confront this issue, the ownership rules and copyright laws are made by the distributors who pursue their own interests. When the purpose of the consumer and distributor intersect the questions always arises: Do people have to pay if there is the way not to pay? Are the restriction laws only made for owners of the product to benefit from the consumers? But what is obvious is that the distributor should not play an import role in consumer-creator interaction. Until eliminating the distributor from the creator-consumer interaction, neither creator nor consumer would benefit from the product.
Distributors earn money from out of the blue; if to be concrete, they benefit from the authors talent and ability to create a product which would meet consumers’ demand. When a consumer buys a product, he pays, firstly, for the distributor but not for the true creator of the product. Pat Reynolds writes “In 1952 the publishers (Allen and Unwin) estimated the price for a single volume of The Lord of The Rings would be at least £3 10s”. If we assume that distributors, in our case publishers, gave fifty percent of all the profit to Tolkien we can figure out that he got half of the profit. If we also consider that Tolkien distributed the product by himself and got the same profit, it is obvious that the price for his book would cost twice less than the price established by the publishers. Therefore, if the distributor would be eliminated from the consumer-creator interaction, the products would be much cheaper and vast amount of profit would go into the pockets of authors rather than the distributors.
It may seem impossible for the authors to contribute their work without having distributors. Authors worried about unauthorized publications of their books. In the article entitled “My Word”, Susan Blum says “Booksellers worried about pirates; authors worried about unauthorized publications of their books.” She also brings up the question about “Did the copyright laws protect authors or booksellers?” Blum points out that “those seeking to extend the copyright were booksellers rather than authors.” Hence, it is obvious that copyright is protecting the interests of booksellers rather than the authors' because most of the profit from selling the intellectual work of an author goes into pockets of booksellers. However, with the rapid growth of the internet, authors are able to distribute their works without participation of booksellers. Moreover, authors may apply copyright laws to the electronic versions of the material posted on the internet. This copyright would protect only authors rather than distributors, and the intellectual labor of an author would cost less than the price posted by booksellers.
Finally, by eliminating the distributors from the creator—consumer interaction, both creators and consumers will profit. The purpose of the distributor would not intersect with the purpose of the consumer which would not allow consumers to worry about the restriction laws.
Distributors earn money from out of the blue; if to be concrete, they benefit from the authors talent and ability to create a product which would meet consumers’ demand. When a consumer buys a product, he pays, firstly, for the distributor but not for the true creator of the product. Pat Reynolds writes “In 1952 the publishers (Allen and Unwin) estimated the price for a single volume of The Lord of The Rings would be at least £3 10s”. If we assume that distributors, in our case publishers, gave fifty percent of all the profit to Tolkien we can figure out that he got half of the profit. If we also consider that Tolkien distributed the product by himself and got the same profit, it is obvious that the price for his book would cost twice less than the price established by the publishers. Therefore, if the distributor would be eliminated from the consumer-creator interaction, the products would be much cheaper and vast amount of profit would go into the pockets of authors rather than the distributors.
It may seem impossible for the authors to contribute their work without having distributors. Authors worried about unauthorized publications of their books. In the article entitled “My Word”, Susan Blum says “Booksellers worried about pirates; authors worried about unauthorized publications of their books.” She also brings up the question about “Did the copyright laws protect authors or booksellers?” Blum points out that “those seeking to extend the copyright were booksellers rather than authors.” Hence, it is obvious that copyright is protecting the interests of booksellers rather than the authors' because most of the profit from selling the intellectual work of an author goes into pockets of booksellers. However, with the rapid growth of the internet, authors are able to distribute their works without participation of booksellers. Moreover, authors may apply copyright laws to the electronic versions of the material posted on the internet. This copyright would protect only authors rather than distributors, and the intellectual labor of an author would cost less than the price posted by booksellers.
Finally, by eliminating the distributors from the creator—consumer interaction, both creators and consumers will profit. The purpose of the distributor would not intersect with the purpose of the consumer which would not allow consumers to worry about the restriction laws.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Abortion
Opinion: In my opinion, abortion should be permitted case by case.
Support 1: financial problems/uncertainty
Support 2: risk to health both mom and baby
Support 3: social criticism/pressure
Support 1: financial problems/uncertainty
Support 2: risk to health both mom and baby
Support 3: social criticism/pressure
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Dogs and cats as pets
Many people in the world have pets. Some people prefer to have dogs and some prefer to have cats. Some people have both dogs and cats. But dogs and cats are very different pets.
First of all, dogs are very messy. One has to clean up animal hair or accidents they have whereas cats are very tidy and don't need any care. When one keeps a dog in a house, there is also a smell in the apartment. Dogs are very dirty and nuisance. But cats are very neat and don’t mess a lot.
Secondly, dogs require much attention. One has to be always around either to walk the dog or simply feed it. Also, one is responsible for the safety of all the people while walking with a dog in the street. But cats are very domestic pets and don’t need to go outside. In comparison with dogs, cats are very smart and don’t represent a danger to humans.
Finally, dogs are very expensive to keep. One should pay much money for visits to the veterinarian. And since dogs are bigger than cats, one should also buy more pet food and supplies for the dog. However, cats are smaller and don’t need to eat as much as dogs do.
To conclude, both cats and dogs can keep a great company. But, in my opinion, having a cat seems to be the right choice.
First of all, dogs are very messy. One has to clean up animal hair or accidents they have whereas cats are very tidy and don't need any care. When one keeps a dog in a house, there is also a smell in the apartment. Dogs are very dirty and nuisance. But cats are very neat and don’t mess a lot.
Secondly, dogs require much attention. One has to be always around either to walk the dog or simply feed it. Also, one is responsible for the safety of all the people while walking with a dog in the street. But cats are very domestic pets and don’t need to go outside. In comparison with dogs, cats are very smart and don’t represent a danger to humans.
Finally, dogs are very expensive to keep. One should pay much money for visits to the veterinarian. And since dogs are bigger than cats, one should also buy more pet food and supplies for the dog. However, cats are smaller and don’t need to eat as much as dogs do.
To conclude, both cats and dogs can keep a great company. But, in my opinion, having a cat seems to be the right choice.
Monday, March 8, 2010
The right to die
Thesis statement:
Although many people feel that doctors must do everything possible to keep their patient alive, I believe that euthanasia should be legal for thee reasons.
1st topic sentence:
The first and most important reason to support euthanasia is that some patients who have no chance to recover do not wish to be kept alive on machines.
Supporting details:
A well-known example in the United States is the case of Terri Schiavo, a young woman who went into a coma in 1990.
2nd topic sentence:
A second reason to support euthanasia is that medical costs in the United States are very high.
Supporting details:
According to an administrator at a local hospital, daily hospital room charges average $5000 there.
Supporting details:
Nursing home care is also expensive. A nursing home in our area charges $4500 per month.
3rd topic sentence:
The final reason to support legalizing euthanasia is that the family suffers.
Supporting details:
For instance, a cousin of mine who had been in a motorcycle accident was kept on life-support machines for eight years.
Although many people feel that doctors must do everything possible to keep their patient alive, I believe that euthanasia should be legal for thee reasons.
1st topic sentence:
The first and most important reason to support euthanasia is that some patients who have no chance to recover do not wish to be kept alive on machines.
Supporting details:
A well-known example in the United States is the case of Terri Schiavo, a young woman who went into a coma in 1990.
2nd topic sentence:
A second reason to support euthanasia is that medical costs in the United States are very high.
Supporting details:
According to an administrator at a local hospital, daily hospital room charges average $5000 there.
Supporting details:
Nursing home care is also expensive. A nursing home in our area charges $4500 per month.
3rd topic sentence:
The final reason to support legalizing euthanasia is that the family suffers.
Supporting details:
For instance, a cousin of mine who had been in a motorcycle accident was kept on life-support machines for eight years.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Living in a Big city and in a countryside
Thesis statement:
Living in a big city or in a countryside differs in many ways.
There is a fresh air in the countryside whereas the air is polluted in big cities.
It is much safer to live in the countryside whereas it is very dangerous to live in a big city.
However, in a big city one can earn more money than in the countryside.
Additionally, living in a big city allows one to be up-to-date or socially and technically developed.
Living in a big city or in a countryside differs in many ways.
There is a fresh air in the countryside whereas the air is polluted in big cities.
It is much safer to live in the countryside whereas it is very dangerous to live in a big city.
However, in a big city one can earn more money than in the countryside.
Additionally, living in a big city allows one to be up-to-date or socially and technically developed.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Compare and contrast
Both of the clocks look quite similar, but the numbers on the clock are different. Even though Salvador Dali's clock seems to fly away, the picture on the left seems like melting. The clock on the right picture is on the box, yet the one on the left rests on a tree. Overall, both of them are good pictures.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
