Correction/travail écrit

Correction/travail écrit

Cours gratuits > Forum > Forum anglais: Questions sur l'anglais || En bas

[POSTER UNE NOUVELLE REPONSE] [Suivre ce sujet]

Page 1 / 2 - Voir la page Haut | 1 | 2 | Fin | En bas
Correction/travail écrit
Message de ailnix posté le 09-06-2011 à 14:41:54 (S | E | F)
Bonjour,

Je prépare un travail écrit sur un texte qui sera coté. J’aurai aussi un examen oral sur ma préparation. J’ai remarqué qu’il y avait des personnes qui excellaient en anglais. Donc, j’aimerais savoir si certaines personnes pourraient éventuellement corriger mes erreurs.
Merci pour votre aide.
Afin de mieux comprendre ma dissertation, voici le texte que j’ai choisi (la copie dans le TIME magazine est plus complète car il y a un graphique mais bon): Lien Internet

Les problèmes que je rencontre sont dûs au fait qu’il faut que je passe par le français. Je sais qu’il faudrait que j’arrive à directement partir de l’anglais mais je n’ai pas encore assimilé comment les personnes apprenant cette langue pouvaient réaliser un travail sans passer par le français.

Je précise que je ne mettrai pas la totalité du travail aujourd’hui car je dois préparer l’examen oral de néerlandais de ma fille qui est en 5ème primaire.

Singularity: the day when humanity will be passed by artificial intelligence

Thanks

Above all else, I wanted to thank the English Teachers who allow me to learn and to enjoy this language.

The document

I have chosen this article in the TIME magazine 21st February 2011.

My summary of the article

This article draws our attention to the technological advance in computer science, artificial intelligence, physical science, life science, brain science… Kurzweil demonstrates that the computer progress isn't linear but exponential. One day, a computer will surpass human’s brainpower and later, a computer will surpass humanity’s brainpower (all humans brainpower combined).

The principal subject described in this text is "singularity". This is a concept, according to which, at one hypothetical point of his technological evolution, human civilisation will know a technological growth of superior order. For a lot of people, it is question of artificial intelligence. Beyond this point, progress would only be working by artificial intelligences which are themselves in constant progress. This concept induces such changes on human society. Humans before ‘singularity’ can neither apprehend nor predict these changes of reliable way. The risk could be the loss of human power, politics on his fate.

However, a human being would become immortal by incorporating his consciousness into a robot. A human being would become a cyborg. He would be more intelligent because he could use the ability of a computer to calculate faster... He wouldn't be victim of old age and illness.

This essay draws also our attention on the possibility to reverse old age of using a treatment. It is said that this cure has rejuvenated mice. It is also said that our body could be compared to a machine.

My essay

Introduction

I chose this article because I like computer science. I have always grown with some computers around me. This article doesn’t surprise me because I have noticed progress in computer science. However, when I understood completely it, I realized that I was afraid because now computers and machines are our "slaves", but when they have a consciousness, they might rebel against humanity.

Argumentation

I agree with the fact that the price of fast decreasing and that progress allow to own computers more and more efficient. In 1990, a very slow memory ram of one megabyte cost between 25 and 50 Euros. Now, a very quick memory ram of 2 gigabytes (twice 1,024 megabytes) costs the same price. So, there has been a very big evolution between 1990 and 2011. So, it is certain that computers will become more efficient for some applications than a human being. Besides, computers have already proved that they have surpassed human being in a domain: playing chess...

-------------------
Modifié par lucile83 le 09-06-2011 15:26

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 09-06-2011 à 14:44:28 (S | E)
Nevertheless, now, a computer or an artificial intelligence or a machine doesn’t do anything without being assisted by human being and without receiving instructions. Scientists haven’t had yet the possibility to understand all our brain's functioning. So, it will take a lot of years to create an artificial intelligence which will able to do something alone.

In a dictionary, we find two definitions of consciousness. First, it is a more or less clear perception and knowledge that everybody can have of an external world and of oneself. Secondly, it is an inner feeling which pushes to pass a judgment of value on one’s own action; a sense of good and evil.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 09-06-2011 à 18:31:56 (S | E)
Bonjour lucile83,

Je te remercie d'avoir ajouté: "Merci pour votre aide". C’était un oubli de ma part dans la précipitation.

Par contre, il faudra que tu m'expliques pourquoi tu considères que "l'entièreté" n'est pas égale à "la totalité".

Bonne continuation

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de lucile83, postée le 09-06-2011 à 19:31:29 (S | E)
Bonjour,

J'ai remplacé le mot 'entièreté' qui est si peu employé qu'il ne figure pas dans tous les dictionnaires de français.

Bonne soirée.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 09-06-2011 à 20:35:35 (S | E)
Bonsoir lucile83,

C'est vrai que je vis en Belgique et parfois certains mots ne sont pas utilisés en France. Par exemple, en Belgique, on dit "cumulet" alors qu'en France, on dit "roulade".
xxxxx
Je te remercie et te souhaite une bonne soirée.

-------------------
Modifié par ailnix le 09-06-2011 20:37

-------------------
Modifié par lucile83 le 09-06-2011 21:07
Toute considération personnelle peut être transmise par messagerie interne.
Merci de votre compréhension.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de gerondif, postée le 09-06-2011 à 23:57:56 (S | E)
Bonsoir,
Singularity: the day when humanity will be (présent obligatoire)passed by artificial intelligence

Thanks

Above all(everything) else, I wanted to thank the English Teachers who allow me to learn and to enjoy this language.

The document

I have chosen this article in ~~the~~ TIME magazine from February 21st, 2011.

My summary of the article

This article draws our attention to the technological advance in computer science, artificial intelligence, physical science, life science, brain science… Kurzweil demonstrates that the computer progress (progress in computer science)isn't linear but exponential. One day, a computer will surpass human’s brainpower and later, a computer will surpass humanity’s brainpower (all humans' brainpower combined).

The principal(main) subject described in this text is "singularity". This is a concept according to which, at one hypothetical point of his (its)technological evolution, human civilisation will know a technological growth of superior order. For a lot of people, it is a question of artificial intelligence. Beyond this point, progress would only be working by artificial intelligences which are themselves in constant progress. This concept induces such changes on human society. Humans before ‘singularity’ can neither apprehend nor predict these changes of in a reliable way. The risk could be the loss of human power, politics on his fate.(quel sens? à qui his fait-il référence, le dernier mot était humans au pluriel)
However, a human being would become immortal by incorporating his consciousness into a robot. A human being would become a cyborg. He would be more intelligent because he could use the ability of a computer to calculate faster... He wouldn't be victim of (subjected to) old age and illness.

This essay also draws our attention (to) on the possibility to reverse old age of using a treatment. It is said that this cure has rejuvenated mice. It is also said that our body could be compared to a machine.

My essay

Introduction

I chose this article because I like computer science. I have always grown with some computers around me. This article doesn’t surprise me because I have noticed progress in computer science. However, when I understood it completely , I realized that I was afraid because now computers and machines are our "slaves", but when they have a consciousness, they might rebel against humanity.

Argumentation

I agree with the fact that the price of fast decreasing and that progress allows us to own more and more efficient computers . In 1990, a very slow memory ram of one megabyte cost between 25 and 50 Euros. Now, a very quick memory ram of 2 gigabytes (twice 1,024 megabytes) costs the same price. So, there has been a very big evolution between 1990 and 2011. So, it is certain that computers will become more efficient for some applications than a human being. Besides, computers have already proved that they have surpassed human being in a domain: playing chess...

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de gerondif, postée le 10-06-2011 à 00:01:44 (S | E)
suite:

Nevertheless, now, a computer or an artificial intelligence or a machine doesn’t do anything without being assisted by a human being and without receiving instructions. Scientists haven’t had yet the possibility to understand all our brain's functioning.(to understand how how brain works completely) So, it will take a lot of years to create an artificial intelligence which will (qui sera capable, manque l'auxiliaire être)able to do something alone (by itself).

In a dictionary, we find two definitions of (for) consciousness. First, it is a more or less clear perception and knowledge that everybody can have of an external world and of oneself. Secondly, it is an inner feeling which pushes to pass a judgment of value on one’s own action; a sense of good and evil.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 10-06-2011 à 19:23:01 (S | E)
Bonsoir gerondif,

Je te remercie pour les corrections. Je vais regarder tout cela. En attendant, je mets le prochain paragraphe. Ce qui est en bleu a été barré dans une première correction mais je ne sais pas pourquoi.

Now, a computer or an artificial intelligence or a machine don’t have a consciousness. When they have a consciousness, I think that they will react differently. First, they will not stay the humanity’s “slave”. Secondly, human being has already demonstrated that an intelligent person could create something to destroy other people, we can’t omit that an artificial intelligence will try to destroy humanity, even if an artificial intelligence could create something interesting, just like humans have already created (vaccine against rage...). Besides, some people have already created a good thing for them without thinking that their invention could be used differently to do evil. Why should we take the risk to be destroyed by an artificial intelligence?

Bon weekend

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de gerondif, postée le 10-06-2011 à 20:06:36 (S | E)
Bonsoir,

Now, a computer or an artificial intelligence or a machine don’t have a consciousness. (j'aurais mis: If they had a consciousness, they would react differently, ce qui parait plus logique comme temps)When they have a consciousness, I think that they will react differently. First, they will not stay the humanity’s “slave”. (ça fait un peu français traduit)Secondly, the human being has already demonstrated that an intelligent person could create something to destroy other people, we can’t omit (fait un peu français traduit, on dirait we must remember, we must keep in mind that...., "one" fait un peu ampoulé)that an artificial intelligence will try to destroy humanity, even if an artificial intelligence could create something interesting, just like(plutôt as en anglais correct) humans have already created (a vaccine against rage...). Besides, some people have already created a good thing for them (fait un peu français traduit)without thinking that their invention could be used differently to do evil. Why should we take the risk to be destroyed by an artificial intelligence?

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 10-06-2011 à 20:44:25 (S | E)
Bonsoir gerondif,

Pour l'erreur pas de futur après when, je suis vraiment stupide, je le sais mais je fais encore cette erreur. Donc, le titre devient: "Singularity: the day when humanity is passed by artificial intelligence".

Dans la phrase "Above all else...", je n'ai pas compris pourquoi tu mets le "all" en rouge. Si je regarde la traduction de avant toute chose au dictionnaire, j'ai "above all" en cherchant "avant" et en cherchant "chose" je trouve above all (else).

Dans la phrase "Kurzweil demonstrates...", je pense aussi que "progress in computer science" est plus approprié.

Dans la phrase "One day, a computer will surpass human’s brainpower", je n'ai pas compris pourquoi tu as mis "'s" en rouge car j'avais déjà mis "'s".

Dans la phrase "The principal subject...", je reconnais que "main" est mieux que "principal".

Dans la phrase "... at one hypothetical point of...", au départ j'avais mis "her", dans la première correction, il est marqué wrong pronoum (pourtant civilisation est féminin pour moi). Donc, j'ai mis "his" et toi tu me proposes "its". Quel est la bonne solution au final?

Dans la phrase "This concept induces such changes...", le such représente en français "tellement de changements". Dans la première correction, rien n’a été précisé.

Dans la phrase "...predict the changes of in a reliable way", dois-je supprimer le "of" ou mettre "of in"?

Pour "politics on his fate", c'est vrai qu'au départ mon paragraphe était formulé autrement et quand j'ai mis humans au pluriel je n'ai pas changé, donc, ça deviendrait "politics on their fate".

Dans la phrase "He wouldn't be victim of...", c'est vrai que "subjected to" est sûrement meilleur.

Dans la phrase "This essay also draws...", j'ai remis le "also" au bon endroit. Dans phrase pourquoi mets-tu en rouge le "on" (attention on the possibility) et le "of" (old age of using) en rouge? Dans la première correction le "on" semblait bon. Par contre, j'avais mis "in" (old age in using) qui n'était pas bon.

Dans la phrase "I understood it completely...", j'ai remis le "it" au bon endroit.

Pour le "of fast decreasing", dans la première correction, j'avais mis "price decreasing and...", je devais ajouter le "of" et une précision d'où le "fast".

Pour le "allows us", c'est vrai que cela s'accorde avec "the fact".

Pour "efficient computers", dans la première correction, il n'y avait pas d'erreur pour la place de "computer" mais bon, je vais remettre "efficient computers".

Pour le "by a human being" (faut-il le "a" car un super ordinateur est souvent assisté par plusieurs personnes, avant la première correction j'avais mis by humans mais on m'a barré le "s" et mis une croix. Comme a un endroit on m’avait ajouté le "being" derrière "human", je pensais que c’était la même erreur.

Pour "two definitions for consciousness" j'ai mis le "for" comme tu l'as précisé.

Pour le "if they had a consciousness...", je suis tout à fait d'accord mais comme le reste est au futur, je me suis dit que je devrais apporter d'autres changements.

Pour le "the humanity's "slave"", dans la première correction, il était seulement précisé que je devais ajouter un article. Mais tu sais je pars toujours du français pour faire mes phrases en anglais (rire).

Dans la phrase "Secondly, human being", étant donné que c'est l'être humain en général, je pensais qu'il ne fallait pas de "the".

Pour le can't omit, dans la première correction, il n'y avait pas de remarque. Tu sais à la base je suis belge et pas anglais (rire).

Pour le "just like", au départ j'avais mis "...could create interesting something as humans, il était annoté "just like" au dessus de "as" qui était souligné.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 10-06-2011 à 20:48:47 (S | E)
Pour "created a good thing for them", comme je l'ai dit je passe toujours par le français (rire) et si je rends un travail trop retravaillé, mon professeur (femme) saura que cela ne vient pas de moi.

Mon idée principale en mettant mon travail ici était surtout de corriger mes fautes car dans la première correction, les annotations sont au bic et ce n'est pas toujours simple de les comprendre. Parfois, je dois changer toute une partie qui est soulignée car on ne comprenait pas le sens. J'aimerais avoir un bon résultat.

J’essaierai de corriger la suite le plus rapidement possible pour la mettre ici.

Au final, je me rends compte que je fais encore beaucoup d'erreurs en anglais pourtant je suis au niveau UF6 et ce travail est pour le niveau UF7 (travail écrit plus présentation orale devant un jury). Je ne me vois vraiment pas en UF8 l'année prochaine (niveau approfondi).

Je te remercie encore une fois pour les corrections et te souhaite un bon weekend.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de gerondif, postée le 10-06-2011 à 23:23:06 (S | E)
Bonsoir,

"above all" par dessus tout, sans rien derrière. en fait on pourrait mettre: first of all,(tout d'abord) ou first and foremost (avant toute chose), bien meilleur.

Dans la phrase "One day, a computer will surpass human’s brainpower", je n'ai pas compris pourquoi tu as mis "'s" en rouge car j'avais déjà mis "'s". parce que human sera alors adjectif, sinon, c'est faux il faudrait dire man's brainpower.

Dans la phrase "... at one hypothetical point of...", au départ j'avais mis "her", dans la première correction, il est marqué wrong pronoum (pourtant civilisation est féminin pour moi). Donc, j'ai mis "his" et toi tu me proposes "its". Quel est la bonne solution au final? je propose its en effet

Dans la phrase "This concept induces such changes...", le such représente en français "tellement de changements". Dans la première correction, rien n’a été précisé.tellement de changements: so many changes. such changes = de tels changements
Dans la phrase "...predict the changes of in a reliable way", supprimer le "of" et mettre "in a "
Pour "politics on his fate", c'est vrai qu'au départ mon paragraphe était formulé autrement et quand j'ai mis humans au pluriel je n'ai pas changé, donc, ça deviendrait "politics on their fate".

Dans la phrase "This essay also draws...", j'ai remis le "also" au bon endroit. Dans phrase pourquoi mets-tu en rouge le "on" (attention on the possibility)(à remplacer par to) et le "of" (old age by using en utilisant, notion de moyen) en rouge?

Pour le "of fast decreasing", dans la première correction, j'avais mis "price decreasing and...", je devais ajouter le "of" et une précision d'où le "fast".

Pour le "by a human being" (faut-il le "a" car un super ordinateur est souvent assisté par plusieurs personnes, alors mettre human beings

Pour le "if they had a consciousness...", je suis tout à fait d'accord mais comme le reste est au futur, je me suis dit que je devrais apporter d'autres changements.

Pour le "the humanity's "slave"", ce n'est pas un rapport de propriété, je préférerais: they won't remain for ever slaves of the human race, le dico donne même slaves to the human race. voir aussi participe passé "enslaved to the human race".

Dans la phrase "Secondly, human being", étant donné que c'est l'être humain en général, je pensais qu'il ne fallait pas de "the". dans ce cas human beings au pluriel sans article, sinon mettre the human being

Pour le "just like", au départ j'avais mis "...could create interesting something as humans, il était annoté "just like" au dessus de "as" qui était souligné. like + nom, as + complétive.(I've been working like a dog, I worked a lot as you had requested)

Pour "created a good thing for them",(pas terrible quand même) comme je l'ai dit je passe toujours par le français (rire) et si je rends un travail trop retravaillé, mon professeur (femme, donc subtile et intelligente et que vous ne pourrez pas tromper, c'est bien pour cela que vous précisiez le sexe du correcteur, I presume ??) saura que cela ne vient pas de moi.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 12-06-2011 à 12:24:36 (S | E)
Bonjour gerondif,

Je te remercie encore une fois pour toutes les précisions et corrections que tu m'apportes.

Pour revenir sur la partie avec le "such changes", dans ma première présentation, il traduisait bien "de tels changements" mais le professeur m'avait souligné une grande partie de ma phrase qui était incompréhensible. En rouge, tu trouveras ce que je voulais exprimer en français. En vert, la façon dont je l’ai exprimée avant la première correction. Entre "which" et "way" tout était souligné. C'est pour cela que j'ai changé la manière d'exprimer ce passage et que le "such changes" n'était plus approprié. Si tu as une idée pour exprimer ma première idée, je suis preneur.

Il induit des changements tels sur la société humaine que l’Homme d’avant la Singularité ne peut ni les appréhender ni les prédire de manière fiable.

This concept induces such changes on human society, which human before the singularity can neither apprehends them nor predicts them of reliable way.

Pour le fait que je mette mon professeur (femme), c'est parce que contrairement à instituteur / institutrice, avec professeur on ne sait pas distinguer un homme d'une femme. C’est vrai qu’elle me connaît bien puisque je l'ai eu trois années (deux années au graduat en secrétariat de direction et cette année en cours du soir en anglais général). J’aimerais vraiment arriver à pouvoir utiliser l’anglais dans un job futur mais je sais que je ne suis pas doué en langue étrangère.

Je te souhaite un bon appétit et je continue ma correction cette après-midi.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 12-06-2011 à 16:26:01 (S | E)
Bonjour,

Je mets la suite et la fin de ma présentation. Quand tout aura été analysé par d’autres internautes et que toutes les questions auront été débattues, je mettrai la dernière version corrigée de la totalité de ma présentation pour vérifier qu’il n’y a plus d’erreurs.

Je tiens à vous remercier pour votre aide ainsi que le temps que vous passez à corriger ce travail. J’espère qu’un jour, je pourrais apporter une contribution à ce site Internet. Je vous souhaite une bonne fin de journée.

Concerning old age, the more time passes, the more scientists increase life expectancy. However, when we are able to put our consciousness into a machine, will we keep the control or will the machine control our consciousness? The text draws our attention on the fact that we will be able to live virtually in software. But, reality offers more interests than virtuality. Imagine making virtual love without physical contact, eating a virtual peppered steak without flavour… Even if we could create the same sensation with electronics because every sensation is an impulse in our brain, it won’t be real.

However, I have noticed that virtuality offers some interesting aspects. For example, virtuality allows shy people to be in contact with other people. When a family is separated by a very big distance, the family can remain in contact with the Internet or the telephone. And yet, virtuality will never replace reality, having a barbecue with one’s family; meeting a woman, smelling her perfume, contemplating her smile, her charm, her attitude (for instance, her way to move her hair tuft which comes in front of her eyes…).

If we refer to scientists' analyses who have compared our brain with computers for the power, they have determined our power brain is between 1013 and 1019 instructions per second. In 2010, a supercomputer, named Tianhe-IA1, reached 2,566 petaFLOPS (1 petaFLOPS is 1015 FLOPS (FLoating point Operations Per Second)). Mira2, expected in 2012, should be four times more powerful with 10 petaFLOPS. Despite these analyses, can you compare the human brain with a computer? A brain is more complex than a computer. Contrary to a human, a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine don’t suffer when they do something. For example, when someone does maths, after a long time, he can have headache; when someone moves house, the next days, he can have muscle ache. Contrary to a human, a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine aren’t troubled by anything or anyone. For instance, if my daughter is ill, when I do something, a part of my brain concentrates about her; if a wife leaves her husband, when he does something, a part of his brain concentrates about this problem (why does his wife leave him?...). So, the main difference between a human being and a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine is the fact that a human being feels emotions, he can be troubled by a problem (family, physical, psychological… problems); while a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine uses every power to follow their instructions. So, we shouldn’t compare our brain power and a computer power. We shouldn’t compare our body and a machine.

Conclusion

We can’t do without computers, artificial intelligence and machines because they allow to progress, to create things, to find solutions, to simulate disasters… We can improve our computer, artificial intelligence and machine to become faster, better, more interesting… But, we shouldn’t try to create a living being who could exterminate humanity.

Vocabulary list

Android is an automaton whose appearance evokes the human being.

Astrophysics is the part of astronomy that studies nature, physical properties, formation and evolution of stars.

Cyborg is a human being who received transplants of mechanical parts.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 12-06-2011 à 16:26:41 (S | E)
Nanotechnology and nanoscience are the design, manufacture and manipulation of structures, devices and hardware systems across less than forty nanometers.

Nanometer is a billionth of a meter (10-9 meter).

Nanoscience and nanotechnology involve several scientific disciplines such as electronics, mechanics, chemistry, optics, biology that manipulate objects with a size of a nanometer.

A major objective of nanotechnology is to create nanomachines.

Telomeres are the end of a chromosome intervening in its stability and in the cellular process intervening in old age.

Au fait, je n'ai pas trouvé comment on faisait pour mettre une mise en forme exposant. Donc, en réalité, "our power brain is between 10 exposant 13 and 10 exposant 19 instructions per second", "1 petaFLOPS is 10 exposant 15 FLOPS" et "a meter (10 exposant -9 meter)".

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de gerondif, postée le 13-06-2011 à 18:28:46 (S | E)
Bonsoir,
Pour votre phrase:
Il induit des changements tels sur la société humaine que l’Homme d’avant la Singularité ne peut ni les appréhender ni les prédire de manière fiable.
en modifiant légèrement votre phrase de départ:

The changes (that) this concept induces on human society are such (à accentuer à l'oral) that humans before ‘singularity’ can neither apprehend nor predict them in a reliable way.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de gerondif, postée le 13-06-2011 à 18:41:08 (S | E)
la suite.

Concerning old age, the more time passes, the more scientists increase life expectancy. However, when we are able to put our consciousness into a machine, will we keep the control or will the machine control our consciousness? The text draws our attention on(j'aurais mis to à la place de on) the fact that we will be able to live virtually in software(je ne suis pas sûr que ça passe, pour moi, software est du matériel consommable). But, reality offers more interests than virtuality. Imagine making virtual love without physical contact, eating a virtual peppered steak without flavour… Even if we could create the same sensation with electronics because every sensation is an impulse in our brain, it won’t be real.(si la phrase commence en could, elle devrait se terminer en conditionnel)

However, I have noticed that virtuality offers some interesting aspects. For example, virtuality allows shy people to be in contact with other people. When a family is separated by a very big distance(français traduit, il me semble que: "when members of a family live miles away from each other" passerait mieux), the family can remain in contact with the Internet or the telephone. And yet, virtuality will never replace reality, having a barbecue with one’s family; meeting a woman, smelling her perfume, contemplating her smile, her charm, her attitude (for instance, her way to move her hair tuft (plutôt une mêche qu'une touffe de cheveux non ? sinon, le fantasme tombe un peu à l'eau) which comes in front of her eyes…).

If we refer to scientists' analyses who have compared our brain with(j'aurais mis to) computers for ~~the~~ power, they have determined our power brain is between 1013 and 1019 instructions per second. In 2010, a supercomputer, named Tianhe-IA1, reached 2,566 petaFLOPS (1 petaFLOPS is 1015 FLOPS (FLoating point Operations Per Second)). Mira2, expected in 2012, should be four times more(piège: he is four times as fast as me) powerful with 10 petaFLOPS. Despite these analyses, can you compare the human brain with a computer? A brain is more complex than a computer. Contrary to (cherchez du côté de "unlike")a human being, a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine don’t suffer when they do something. For example, when someone does maths, after a long time, he can have headache; when someone moves house, the next (plutôt following) days, he can have muscle ache. Contrary to a human, a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine aren’t troubled by anything or anyone. For instance, if my daughter is ill, when I do something, a part of my brain concentrates about her; if a wife leaves her husband, when he does something, a part of his brain concentrates about this problem (why does(le prétérit serait plus logique) his wife leave him?...). So, the main difference between a human being and a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine is the fact that a human being feels emotions, he can be troubled by a problem (family, physical, psychological… problems); while a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine uses every power to follow their instructions. So, we shouldn’t compare our brain power and(to) a computer power. We shouldn’t compare our body and a machine.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 13-06-2011 à 18:41:34 (S | E)
Bonsoir gerondif,

Je vous remercie pour votre aide. J'espère que je vais m'en sortir car je dois préparer un autre examen oral d'anglais (UF6) ainsi que ce travail écrit (UF7) pour mercredi soir et l'examen oral (UF7) pour samedi matin. Autant dire qu'il va falloir courir. Si vous pouviez regarder mes définitions, je vous en serais reconnaissant.

Bonne soirée

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de gerondif, postée le 13-06-2011 à 18:46:24 (S | E)
suite,

Conclusion

We can’t do without computers, artificial intelligence and machines because they allow us to progress, to create things, to find solutions, to simulate disasters… We can improve our computers , artificial intelligence and machines to become faster, better, more interesting… But, we shouldn’t try to create a living being who could exterminate humanity.

Vocabulary list

An android is an automaton whose appearance evokes the human being.

Astrophysics is the part of astronomy that studies nature, physical properties, formation and the evolution of stars.

A cyborg is a human being who received transplants of mechanical parts.

Nanotechnology and nanoscience are the design, manufacture and manipulation of structures, devices and hardware systems across (??)less than forty nanometers.(2cm de large: two centimetres wide)

A nanometer is a billionth of a meter (10-9 meter).

Nanoscience and nanotechnology involve several scientific disciplines such as electronics, mechanics, chemistry, optics, biology that manipulate objects with a size of a nanometer.

A(the) major objective of nanotechnology is to create nanomachines.

Telomeres are the end of a chromosome intervening in its stability and in the cellular process intervening in old age.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 13-06-2011 à 19:04:22 (S | E)
Bonsoir gerondif,

Voici les définitions en français sur lesquelles je me suis basées: Lien Internet

across comme préposition = d'un côté à l'autre de
accross comme adverbe = de large (j'ai trouvé cet exemple au dictionnaire the river is 5 km across = le fleuve a (fait) 5 km de large)

Néanmoins, je ne sais pas si je l’ai bien utilisé. Au fait, une petite précision, 40 nanomètres correspond à 0,000004 cm: Lien Internet

Bonne continuation

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de gerondif, postée le 13-06-2011 à 19:14:08 (S | E)
Bonsoir,
si vous tenez à votre "across" dont l'usage à la place de wide m'était inconnu, alors:

hardware systems less than forty nanometers across // less than forty nanometers wide / big / large.

Je préfère mes solutions aux vôtres, wide c'est la largeur, big et large c'est la taille globale.... across donne l'idée de traverser, ça va pour la rivière.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 14-06-2011 à 18:09:49 (S | E)
Bonsoir gerondif,

Vous savez je ne suis pas un expert en anglais. Donc, je pense que "wide" ou "large" (taille globale) convient mieux.

Je suis désolé pour les questions qui vont suivre mais vous êtes plus critique que mon professeur et j’aime tout comprendre (rire).

Dans la phrase "I have chosen this article in the TIME magazine from February 21st, 2011.", pourquoi ne faut-il pas le "the", je sais que l'on supprime le "the" quand on parle d'une généralité mais n'est-ce pas au pluriel? Par exemple, pour traduire "En angleterre, les magasins ouvrent à 9h00.", ce sera, "In England, shops open at 9.00 a.m / nine o'clock.". Pourquoi faut-il une virgule après 21st?

Pour la phrase "One day, a computer will surpass human’s brainpower and...", je n'ai pas compris la différence entre le fait de mettre "man's" ou "human's". Le fait qu’un soit adjectif et pas l’autre? Dans ma présentation, il y a bien "humanity's brainpower" et "all humans' brainpower combined" et là, le sens est correct.

J'aimerais savoir s'il y a une différence en anglais entre les guillemets "singularity" et les apostrophes 'singularity", je sais dans le cas de l'écriture d'un nombre, en anglais on écrira 19,120.99 au lieu de 19.120,99 en français.

Dans la phrase "For a lot of people, it is a question of artificial intelligence", pourquoi faut-il "a" devant "question", en anglais "question" est indénombrable et en français on ne mettrait pas non plus de "un" devant "question": "Pour beaucoup, il est question d'intelligence artificielle". Au fait après "artificielle", j'aimerais ajouter ceci: quelle que soit la méthode pour la créer." mais je ne sais pas comment l’intégré au reste d'une manière correcte en anglais. Si j'utilise le traducteur, pour traduire ceci: "Pour beaucoup, il est question d'intelligence artificielle quelle que soit la méthode pour la créer.", cela donne ceci: "For many it comes to artificial intelligence regardless of the method to create it.". Je sais que je ne devrais pas utiliser le traducteur de Google mais c'est tellement rapide (rire).

Pour la phrase "I agree with I agree with the fact that the price of fast decreasing and...", je n'ai pas de meilleure solution pour "of fast decreasing".

Pour la phrase "..., we must keep in mind that...", je me demandais si on devait utiliser "must" ou "have to", j'avais vu la différence et si je me souviens bien, si c'est par rapport à une obligation extérieure (règlement…), on doit utiliser "have to". Par exemple, "je dois nettoyer mon appartement" se traduira par "I must clean my flat", car l'obligation vient de soi-même. Tandis que pour la phrase "les infirmières doivent utiliser des gants de chirurgien", cela sera "nurses have to use surgical gloves", car l’obligation vient du règlement de travail. J’avoue que pour "..., we must keep in mind that...", je ne sais pas trop quoi en penser.

Dans le même paragraphe vous dites que "one" fait un peu ampoulé (emphatique, prétentieux, pompeux), je n'ai pas compris à quoi cela se rapportait.

Pour le passage "...without being assisted by human beings..., j'aimerais savoir la différence entre "humans being" et "human beings". Dans quel cas, "human" prendra le "s" et dans quel cas "being" prendra le "s".

Pour le passage "created a good thing for them", je n'ai pas de meilleure solution.

Pour le passage "won’t be real", mon professeur n'avait pas annoté de remarque mais "wouldn't be real" me semble aussi plus logique pour la concordance des temps.

Au dictionnaire, du côté français vers anglais, "mèche de cheveux = tuft of hair" mais il y a aussi "lock of hair", si on ne peut plus se fier dessus (rire). Du côté anglais vers français, "tuft of hair = épi ou touffe de cheveux", j'ai vu que "lock [+hair] = mèche". Si vous avez quelque chose de meilleure, je suis preneur. Vous êtes plus critique que mon professeur qui m'avait juste barré le "of" et signaler que "tuft" allait derrière "hair".

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 14-06-2011 à 18:10:44 (S | E)
Pour le passage "...who have compared our brain to computers for power..." pourquoi faut-il supprimer le "the" devant "power", je sais que c'est la puissance en général, mais j'ai eu une remarque de mon professeur que je n'ai pas trop comprise avec le fait que "the" représente le pluriel ou le singulier, apparemment quand "the" représente le pluriel on l'enlève quand le sens "en général" est exprimé, je ne suis pas sûr que ce soit valable pour le cas du "the" singulier. Comme je n’avais pas d’annotation à cet endroit, je doute de plus en plus.

Bonne continuation

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 14-06-2011 à 18:16:20 (S | E)
Bonsoir,

Afin d’avoir une idée plus claire, j’ai décidé de remettre toute ma présentation corrigée. Si vous avez des avis supplémentaires, je reste preneur.

Singularity: the day when humanity is passed by artificial intelligence

Thanks

First and foremost, I wanted to thank the English Teachers who allow me to learn and to enjoy this language.

The document

I have chosen this article in TIME magazine 21st February, 2011.

My summary of the article

This article draws our attention to the technological advance in computer science, artificial intelligence, physical science, life science, brain science… Kurzweil demonstrates that progress in computer science isn't linear but exponential. One day, a computer will surpass man’s brainpower and later, a computer will surpass humanity’s brainpower (all humans’ brainpower combined).

The main subject described in this text is "singularity". This is a concept, according to which, at one hypothetical point of its technological evolution, human civilisation will know a technological growth of superior order. For a lot of people, it is a question of artificial intelligence. Beyond this point, progress would only be working by artificial intelligences which are themselves in constant progress. The changes this concept induces on human society are such that humans before "singularity" can neither apprehend nor predict them in a reliable way. The risk could be the loss of human power and politics on their fate.

However, a human being would become immortal by incorporating his consciousness into a robot. A human being would become a cyborg. He would be more intelligent because he could use the ability of a computer to calculate faster... He wouldn't be subjected to old age and illness.

This essay also draws our attention to the possibility to reverse old age by using a treatment. It is said that this cure has rejuvenated mice. It is also said that our body could be compared to a machine.

My essay

Introduction

I chose this article because I like computer science. I have always grown with some computers around me. This article doesn’t surprise me because I have noticed progress in computer science. However, when I understood it completely, I realized that I was afraid because now computers and machines are our "slaves", but when they have a consciousness, they might rebel against humanity.

Argumentation

I agree with the fact that the price of fast decreasing and that progress allows us to own more and more efficient computers. In 1990, a very slow memory ram of one megabyte cost between 25 and 50 Euros. Now, a very quick memory ram of 2 gigabytes (twice 1,024 megabytes) costs the same price. So, there has been a very big evolution between 1990 and 2011. So, it is certain that computers will become more efficient for some applications than a human being. Besides, computers have already proved that they have surpassed human being in a domain: playing chess…

Nevertheless, now, a computer or an artificial intelligence or a machine doesn’t do anything without being assisted by human beings and without receiving instructions. Scientists haven’t had yet the possibility to understand how our brain works completely. So, it will take a lot of years to create an artificial intelligence which will be able to do something by itself.

In a dictionary, we find two definitions for consciousness. First, it is a more or less clear perception and knowledge that everybody can have of an external world and of oneself. Secondly, it is an inner feeling which pushes to pass a judgment of value on one’s own action; a sense of good and evil.
-------------------
Modifié par lucile83 le 14-06-2011 21:10
couleur

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 14-06-2011 à 18:20:19 (S | E)
Now, a computer or an artificial intelligence or a machine don’t have a consciousness. If they had a consciousness, they would react differently. First, they will not remain for ever slaves of the human race. Secondly, the human beings has already demonstrated that an intelligent person could create something to destroy other people, we must keep in mind that an artificial intelligence will try to destroy humanity, even if an artificial intelligence could create something interesting just like humans (vaccine against rage...). Besides, some people have already created a good thing for them without thinking that their invention could be used differently to do evil. Why should we take the risk to be destroyed by an artificial intelligence?

Concerning old age, the more time passes, the more scientists increase life expectancy. However, when we are able to put our consciousness into a machine, will we keep the control or will the machine control our consciousness? The text draws our attention to the fact that we will be able to live virtually in a computer program. But, reality offers more interests than virtuality. Imagine making virtual love without physical contact, eating a virtual peppered steak without flavour… Even if we could create the same sensation with electronics because every sensation is an impulse in our brain, it wouldn’t be real.

However, I have noticed that virtuality offers some interesting aspects. For example, virtuality allows shy people to be in contact with other people. When members of a family live miles away from each other, the family can remain in contact with the Internet or the telephone. And yet, virtuality will never replace reality, having a barbecue with one’s family; meeting a woman, smelling her perfume, contemplating her smile, her charm, her attitude (for instance, her way to move her hair lock which comes in front of her eyes…).

If we refer to scientists' analyses who have compared our brain to computers for power, they have determined our power brain is between 1013 and 1019 instructions per second. In 2010, a supercomputer, named Tianhe-IA1, reached 2,566 petaFLOPS (1 petaFLOPS is 1015 FLOPS (FLoating point Operations Per Second)). Mira2, expected in 2012, should be four times as fast as Tianhe-IA1 with 10 petaFLOPS. Despite these analyses, can you compare the human brain to a computer? A brain is more complex than a computer. Unlike a human being, a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine don’t suffer when they do something. For example, when someone does maths, after a long time, he can have headache; when someone moves house, the following days, he can have muscle ache. Unlike a human being, a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine aren’t troubled by anything or anyone. For instance, if my daughter is ill, when I do something, a part of my brain concentrates about her; if a wife leaves her husband, when he does something, a part of his brain concentrates about this problem (why did his wife leave him?...). So, the main difference between a human being and a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine is the fact that a human being feels emotions, he can be troubled by a problem (family, physical, psychological… problems); while a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine uses every power to follow their instructions. So, we shouldn’t compare our brain power to a computer power. We shouldn’t compare our body to a machine.

Conclusion

We can’t do without computers, artificial intelligence and machines because they allow us to progress, to create things, to find solutions, to simulate disasters… We can improve our computers, artificial intelligence and machines to become faster, better, more interesting… But, we shouldn’t try to create a living being who could exterminate humanity.

-------------------
Modifié par lucile83 le 14-06-2011 21:11
couleur

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 14-06-2011 à 18:21:09 (S | E)
Vocabulary list

An android is an automaton whose appearance evokes the human being.

Astrophysics is the part of astronomy that studies nature, physical properties, formation and the evolution of stars.

A cyborg is a human being who received transplants of mechanical parts.

Nanotechnology and nanoscience are the design, manufacture and manipulation of structures, devices and hardware systems less than forty nanometers large.

Nanometer is a billionth of a meter (10-9 meter).

Nanoscience and nanotechnology involve several scientific disciplines such as electronics, mechanics, chemistry, optics, biology that manipulate objects with a size of a nanometer.

The major objective of nanotechnology is to create nanomachines.

Telomeres are the end of a chromosome intervening in its stability and in the cellular process intervening in old age.

-------------------
Modifié par lucile83 le 14-06-2011 21:11
couleur

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de gerondif, postée le 14-06-2011 à 19:03:55 (S | E)
Bonsoir,
merci pour votre "bonne continuation", qui m'incite gentiment à continuer à vous corriger

"I have chosen this article in "TIME magazine" from February 21st, 2011.je cite le titre du magazine, qui ne comporte pas de "the" , c'est un nom propre en quelque sorte.
Pourquoi faut-il une virgule après 21st? parce que la date s'écrit en général: Tuesday, June 14th, 2011.
human tout seul semble être un adjectif, qui ne pourra pas se mettre au cas possessif. My reaction is only human.Quand on parle des hommes, il vaut mieux employer man ou men , ou alors human beings avec human comme adjectif.

J'aimerais savoir s'il y a une différence en anglais entre les guillemets "singularity" et les apostrophes 'singularity", là je ne sais plus exactement,je chercherai si j'ai le temps.
Il me semble en effet qu'en anglais les "quotation marks" sont simples mais là, de tête, je ne suis plus sûr.

Dans la phrase "For a lot of people, it is a question of artificial intelligence", (j'avais compris: c'est une question d'intelligence artificielle comme dans : it's a question of money) que voulez vous dire par"il est question d'intelligence artificielle?

Pour la phrase "I agree with the fact that the price of fast decreasing : Ca veut dire quoi ? je suis d'accord avec le fait que le prix de décroissance rapide ? que vient faire ce "of" ici ? j'aurais compris: I agree that the prices have dropped tremendously, I agree that the prices have decreased fast, mais of n'est pas un verbe. Ou alors: I agree with the fact that prices ARE decreasing fast, vous auriez confondu, is , are, et of ???

Pour la phrase "..., we must keep in mind that...", je me demandais si on devait utiliser "must" ou "have to",
comme vous voulez !

Dans le même paragraphe vous dites que "one" fait un peu ampoulé :one pour dire "on" est un peu rigide, je croyais l'avoir vu quelque part dans le texte, j'ai dû rêver.

Pour le passage "...without being assisted by human beings..., j'aimerais savoir la différence entre "humans being" et "human beings". He hates all humans (nom puriel) He hates all human beings (human est adjectif épithète invariable)

Pour le passage "created a good thing for them", je n'ai pas de meilleure solution. "ils ont créé une bonne chose pour eux" fait un peu "baby talk" . je mettrais: they have created something good for mankind without realizing that....

"lock of hair", irait bien.

Pour le passage "...who have compared our brain to computers for power..." pourquoi faut-il supprimer le "the" devant "power", parce que c'est la puissance en général, .

On ne met pas de déterminant quand on parle d'un produit en général, cet ensemble vide (*) pouvant alors signifier soit: du de la des , soit: le la les:

I like * tea (le)/ I drink * tea (du)
I like * books (les)/ I often read * books.(des)

"the" est la formule allégée de "this", qui implique que l'on définit l'objet avec plus de précision, qu'on pourrait le montrer.

I like * cakes but I dont like the cakes YOU make because they taste awful !

Open the windows: elles sont là dans la salle.

Never leave windows open ! conseil général, les fenêtres sont dans ma tête, pas forcément à côté de moi.

Don't touch the/this/that/dog ! It might bite you ! c'est un chien précis, celui qui est à côté de vous.

Let * sleeping dogs lie ! généralité, proverbe.

-------------------
Modifié par lucile83 le 14-06-2011 21:14
bug couleur

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de gerondif, postée le 14-06-2011 à 19:39:20 (S | E)
suite,
Singularity: the day when humanity is passed by artificial intelligence

Thanks

First and foremost, I wanted to thank the English Teachers who allow me to learn and to enjoy this language.

The document

I have chosen this article in TIME magazine from (ou dated) February 21st, 2011.

My summary of the article

This article draws our attention to the technological advance in computer science, artificial intelligence, physical science, life science, brain science… Kurzweil demonstrates that progress in computer science isn't linear but exponential. One day, a computer will surpass man’s brainpower and later, a computer will surpass humanity’s brainpower (all humans’ brainpower combined).

The main subject described in this text is "singularity". This is a concept, according to which, at one hypothetical point of its technological evolution, human civilisation will know a technological growth of superior order. For a lot of people, it is a question of artificial intelligence. Beyond this point, progress would only be working by artificial intelligences which are themselves in constant progress. The changes this concept induces on human society are such that humans before "singularity" can neither apprehend nor predict them in a reliable way. The risk could be the loss of human power and politics on their fate.(que veut dire cette phrase: la perte de pouvoir humain et de politique sur leur destin?)

However, a human being would become immortal by incorporating his consciousness into a robot. A human being would become a cyborg. He would be more intelligent because he could use the ability of a computer to calculate faster... He wouldn't be subjected to old age and illness.

This essay also draws our attention to the possibility to reverse old age by using a treatment. It is said that this cure has rejuvenated mice. It is also said that our body could be compared to a machine.

My essay

Introduction

I chose this article because I like computer science. I have always grown with some computers around me. This article doesn’t surprise me because I have noticed progress in computer science. However, when I understood it completely, I realized that I was afraid because now computers and machines are our "slaves", but when (if serait plus clair) they have a consciousness (one day), they might rebel against humanity.

Argumentation

I agree with the fact that the price of fast decreasing and that progress allows us to own more and more efficient computers. In 1990, a very slow memory ram of one megabyte cost between 25 and 50 Euros. Now, a very quick memory ram of 2 gigabytes (twice 1,024 megabytes) costs the same price. So, there has been a very big evolution between 1990 and 2011. So, it is certain that computers will become more efficient for some applications than a human being. Besides, computers have already proved that they have surpassed human being in a domain(in one field): playing chess…

Nevertheless, now, a computer or an artificial intelligence or a machine doesn’t do anything without being assisted by human beings and without receiving instructions. Scientists haven’t had yet the possibility to understand how our brain works completely. So, it will take a lot of years to create an artificial intelligence which will be able to do something by itself.

In a dictionary, we find two definitions for consciousness. First, it is a more or less clear perception and knowledge that everybody can have of an external world and of oneself. Secondly, it is an inner feeling which pushes to pass a judgment of value on one’s own action; a sense of good and evil.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de gerondif, postée le 14-06-2011 à 19:46:45 (S | E)
suite,
Now, a computer or an artificial intelligence or a machine don’t have a consciousness. If they had a consciousness, they would react differently. First, they will not remain for ever slaves of the human race. Secondly, ~~the~~ human beings has(pluriel) already demonstrated that an intelligent person could create something to destroy other people, we must keep in mind that an artificial intelligence will try to destroy humanity, even if an artificial intelligence could create something interesting just like humans (vaccine against rage...). Besides, some people have already created a good thing (something good) for them without thinking that their invention could be used differently to do evil. Why should we take the risk (of + ing) to be destroyed by an artificial intelligence?

Concerning old age, the more time passes, the more scientists increase life expectancy. However, when we are able to put our consciousness into a machine, will we keep the control or will the machine control our consciousness? The text draws our attention to the fact that we will be able to live virtually in a computer program. But, reality offers more interests than virtuality. Imagine making virtual love without physical contact, eating a virtual peppered steak without flavour… Even if we could create the same sensation with electronics because every sensation is an impulse in our brain, it wouldn’t be real.

However, I have noticed that virtuality offers some interesting aspects. For example, virtuality allows shy people to be in contact with other people. When members of a family live miles away from each other, the family can remain in contact with the Internet or the telephone. And yet, virtuality will never replace reality, having a barbecue with one’s family; meeting a woman, smelling her perfume, contemplating her smile, her charm, her attitude (for instance, her way to move her hair lock (plutôt lock of hair, mêche composée de cheveux) which comes in front of her eyes…).

If we refer to scientists' analyses who have compared our brain to computers for power, they have determined our power brain is between 1013 and 1019 instructions per second. In 2010, a supercomputer, named Tianhe-IA1, reached 2,566 petaFLOPS (1 petaFLOPS is 1015 FLOPS (FLoating point Operations Per Second)). Mira2, expected in 2012, should be four times as fast as Tianhe-IA1 with 10 petaFLOPS. Despite these analyses, can you compare the human brain to a computer? A brain is more complex than a computer. Unlike a human being, a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine don’t suffer when they do something. For example, when someone does maths, after a long time, he can have headache; when someone moves houses, the following days, he can have muscle ache. Unlike a human being, a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine aren’t troubled by anything or anyone. For instance, if my daughter is ill, when I do something, a part of my brain concentrates about her; if a wife leaves her husband, when he does something, a part of his brain concentrates about this problem (why did his wife leave him?...). So, the main difference between a human being and a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine is the fact that a human being feels emotions, he can be troubled by a problem (family, physical, psychological… problems); while a computer, an artificial intelligence or a machine uses every power to follow their instructions. So, we shouldn’t compare our brain power to a computer power. We shouldn’t compare our body to a machine.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de gerondif, postée le 14-06-2011 à 19:49:58 (S | E)
suite et fin, (faim aussi, il est huit heures moins dix!)

Conclusion

We can’t do without computers, artificial intelligence and machines because they allow us to progress, to create things, to find solutions, to simulate disasters… We can improve our computers, artificial intelligence and machines to become faster, better, more interesting… But, we shouldn’t try to create a living being who could exterminate humanity.

Vocabulary list

An android is an automaton whose appearance evokes the human being.

Astrophysics is the part of astronomy that studies nature, physical properties, formation and the evolution of stars.

A cyborg is a human being who received transplants of mechanical parts.

Nanotechnology and nanoscience are the design, manufacture and manipulation of structures, devices and hardware systems less than forty nanometers (large).(on peut ne rien mettre, je préfère big à large mais il n'est pas obligatoire)

A nanometer is a billionth of a meter (10-9 meter).

Nanoscience and nanotechnology involve several scientific disciplines such as electronics, mechanics, chemistry, optics, biology that manipulate objects with a size of a nanometer.

The major objective of nanotechnology is to create nanomachines.

Telomeres are the end of a chromosome intervening in its stability and in the cellular process intervening in old age.

Réponse: Correction/travail écrit de ailnix, postée le 14-06-2011 à 20:57:17 (S | E)
Bonsoir gerondif,

Le fait que j’aie fini par "bonne continuation" n’était pas dans le but de vous refaire tout recorriger. Je vais mettre des commentaires au fur et à mesure que je vous lis.

Pour le passage "For a lot of people, it is a question of artificial intelligence", beaucoup de personnes pensent que ce sera une intelligence artificielle qui nous dépassera. Entre nous, qu'est-ce qui pourrait nous dépasser intellectuellement à part une intelligence artificielle créée par l'homme? Même si on ne peut pas omettre le fait que nous ne sommes peut-être pas seuls dans l'univers (rire).

Pour le passage "I agree with the fact that the price of fast decreasing" au départ j'avais mis "I agree with the facts that price decreasing and progress allow to own computer more and more high-performance.", mon professeur a fait des annotations: "fact" sans "s", entre "that" et "price" "un article", après "price" un "of" et une "croix" (précision), entre le "and" et "progress" "that", "computer" avec un "s" et après more and more on attend un adjectif donc "high-performance" n'était pas bon. Ce n'est pas moi qui ai décidé pour le "of". Si je mets "I agree that the prices haves decreased fast" est-ce que ça ira encore avec "and that progress", ne faut-il pas deux idées semblables quand on lie par un "and"? Par exemple, I ate an apple and a pear. Ce sont deux noms d’une part et d’autre du "and".

Si cette logique doit être respectée, voici une piste: "I agree with the fact that the fall of price and that the rapidity of progress allows us to own more and more efficient computers."

Je vous remercie pour les explications avec le "the" omis ou non.

Pour la phrase "The risk could be the loss of human power and politics on their fate.", je me suis basé sur ce que j’avais lu sur Internet ainsi que sur ce qui était dit dans l’article. Voici ce que j’avais lu sur Internet en français:

La Singularité technologique (ou simplement la Singularité) est un concept, selon lequel, à partir d'un point hypothétique de son évolution technologique, la civilisation humaine connaîtra une croissance technologique d'un ordre supérieur. Pour beaucoup, il est question d'intelligence artificielle quelle que soit la méthode pour la créer. Au-delà de ce point, le progrès ne serait plus l’œuvre que d’Intelligences artificielles, elles-mêmes en constante progression. Il induit des changements tels sur la société humaine que l’Homme d’avant la Singularité ne peut ni les appréhender ni les prédire de manière fiable. Le risque étant la perte de pouvoir humain, politique, sur son destin.

J’ai simplement retranscrit ceci le mieux possible en anglais. Ce qui résumait bien le long passage sur la "singularité" expliquée dans le texte.

Dans le passage "but when they have a consciousness, they might rebel against humanity. Si je remplace le "when" par un "if" faut-il remettre un "will"? Avec "when" pas de futur car c'est une subordonnée de temps mais avec "if" je ne suis pas sûr.

Je suppose que "in one filed" est en réalité "in one field".

Je vous remercie encore pour votre précieuse aide. J'espère pouvoir un jour vous aider (dans un autre domaine que l'anglais bien sûr (rire)).

Bonne soirée

[POSTER UNE NOUVELLE REPONSE] [Suivre ce sujet]

Cours gratuits > Forum > Forum anglais: Questions sur l'anglais

Page 1 / 2 - Voir la page Haut | 1 | 2 | Fin | En bas