TOEFL writing (please proofread)

[frikadel]

One the major problems that blow minds of the scientists is whether a computer can think. In order to find the answer, a special test, the so called Turing test has been developped by a British mathematician, Adam Turing. In brief, a person is involved into communication with two parties one of which is a computer and the other is a human. Once the communication is over this person has to distinguish "who is who". If he or she fails, than the test is passed. Despite numerous competitions and money awards, since 1950, the year of the creation of the test, no computer has passed it.
Even though this method of research seems to be appropriate, it is also criticised. According to one of the points of view the computer can act intelligently without being intellingent. It's the so called chinese room effect. Due to this effect, the relation between computer input and output can be set in such a way, that the answer to the question posed (for exemple) in chinese will be based just on the links between the parts of the question and not on the meaning. Thus neither don't we have an appropriate method nor the answer for one of the most exiting secrets in the hi-tech history.


Pets should be treated like family members

As Antoine de Saint-Exupery once said : "We are responsible for what we have tamed". The days when having a domestic animal was a sort of surviving technic are in the past. Today most people buy pets just for plesure. It means that even though a pet is our property we must treat him like a live creature. But is there any limit to which we have to take care about someone, and especially about our animal? Certainly, this limit exists.
It's often the case for many families to treat a pet (an animal) as a family meber. Perhaps, it's all right but we find such a behaviour a little bit strange. Sure, a live creauture is always a live creature. It's capable to feel bad, to have hunger and even emotions like a human being does, but in the same time an animal is always an animal and despite all the affection a human is capable of it seems impossible for us to treat an animal like a family member. A family member is a human being that is able to think whilst an animal is controlled instincts and relatively low developed brain. With a human you can negociate, but an animal always sees a family as a pack which has a leader and specific hierarchy. That's why the rules applicable for for for human beings (family members) hardly can be applicable for a pet and so the treatment should differ.
We don't suggest being violent - any live creature should be treated with dignity, but we also suggest being reasonnable and remembering the most basic natural laws.

[Gillnetter]

One the major problems that blow the minds of the scientists is whether a computer can think. In order to find the answer, a special test, the so called Turing test has been developped developed by a British mathematician, Adam Turing. In brief, a person is involved into in a communication with two parties, one of which is a computer, and the other is a human. Once the communication is over this person has to distinguish "who is who". If he or she fails, than the test is passed (Unclear of the meaning here. If he or she fails what?). Despite numerous competitions and money awards, since 1950, the year of the creation of the test, no computer has passed it.

Even though this method of research seems to be appropriate, it is also criticised. According to one of the pointspoint of view the computer can act intelligently without being intellingent intelligent. It's the so called Chinese room effect. Due to this effect, the relation between computer input and output can be set in such a way, that the answer to the question posed (for exempleexample) in Chinese will be based just on the links between the parts of the question and not on the meaning. Thus, neither don'tdo we have an appropriate method nor the answer for one of the most exiting exciting secrets in the hi-tech history.


Pets should be treated like family members

As Antoine de Saint-Exupery once said : "We are responsible for what we have tamed". The days when having a domestic animal was a sort of surviving technic technique are in the past. Today most people buy pets just for plesure pleasure. It means that even though a pet is our property we must treat him like a live creature (animals are life creatures). But is there any limit to which we have to take care about someone, and especially about our animal? Certainly, this limit exists.
It's often the case for many families to treat a pet (an animal) as a family meber member. Perhaps, it's all right but we find such a behaviour a little bit strange. Sure, a live creauture is always a live creature. It's capable to feel of feeling bad, to have hunger and even emotions like a human being does, but in at the same time an animal is always an animal and despite all the affection a human is capable of it seems impossible for us to treat an animal like a family member. A family member is a human being that who is able to think, whilst an animal is controlled by instincts and a relatively low developed brain. With a human you can negociate negotiate, but an animal always sees a family as a pack which has a leader and a specific hierarchy. That's why the rules applicable for for for human beings (family members) hardly can be applicable for a pet and so the treatment should differ.
We don't suggest being violent - any live creature should be treated with dignity, but we also suggest being reasonnable reasonable and remembering the most basic natural laws.

Too many words spelled wrong. Some sentences are unclear in their meaning.

[frikadel]

Hi, thank you for the proofread. Unfortunately I have posted the "raw" version, it's all about inattention.

I am preparing for the TOEFL so could you please proofread some more texts? It's of great importance for me. Thank you in advance.


Nowadays, the higher education is no more the privilege of lords and princes. This means that more and more young people become students. This short period of time is very important for any individual - it's when his or her future life will be defined. Nevertheless, almost any ex-student speaks of his college years with admiration and even some sadness. It's not rare to hear a man telling his son about his student life as of a perfect period when all the problems seemed to be so far away. But is it really true?
Sure, I am myself just a student and hardly can I know anything about my future and the thoughts I will have on the past. However, I know already certain general laws of the universe. In my humble opinion people remember of their school years with such a profound regret not because these years are the best, but because they have misbalanced their life by constant partying and a lack of labor. Moreover, a human being sees the past as something which is far more beautiful than the present. We have a lot of things we don't really need, but once have we lost them, we begin to appreciate what we'd had. The reason for this is our instinct that tells "to stock" but the life is always about "to lose". According to my own experience, I can say that my studies are and have always been really hard. I have to spend a lot of time learning new material which is not always interesting simply because I hope my future to be easier and brighter than it possibly may be. So, why to regret anything that was so rough? We'll never have another life to live, thus my message is very plain, each day is an excellent day and shouldn't you spoil it with any useless regrets about "the good times".


Built in 1956 and opened in 1973, the Sydney Opera House is one of the most renowned buildings in the whole world. The most famous part of this building is certainly the shell-like roof, construction of which was a serious challenge. 200 feet from top to bottom this splendid combination of tensioned steel, ceramic tiles and huge shells resembles a ship in the harbor and harmonizes with the environment. Experts claim that this building is an example of a certain architecture school, but it's not definitely true. Even though influence of organic and international schools is obvious, hardly can we say that it belongs to any current. Its modern concept is common for the International School, but its shape isn't. It harmonizes with the environment (a trait of the Organic school), but the aesthetic function is more important. Even though it's constructed in cooperation with engineers it's not completely a High-tech school product. And the conclusion is quite simple any object unique in its kind is always a combination of different features.