Highlight the central idea in pink and supporting details in yellow. Their complexions too, differing so much from ours, their long hair and the language they spoke (which was very different from any I had ever heard) united to confirm in me this belief. Indeed such were the horrors of my views and fears at the moment that, if ten thousand worlds had been my own, I would have freely parted with them all to have exchanged my condition with that of the meanest slave in my own country. When I looked round the ship too and saw a large furnace or copper boiling and a multitude of black people of every description chained together, every one of their countenances expressing dejection and sorrow, I no longer doubted of my fate; and quite overpowered with horror and anguish, I fell motionless on the deck and fainted. Paraphrase the central idea.

the hunger games, written by  suzanne collins, is fiction in the young adult genre, which is not my age group, but i found myself unable to put it down. its combination of nerve-racking tension, thrilling action, and engaging love story kept me up until the wee hours. i was surprised at how completely engrossing the plot was. like  brave new world, this story is set in a future where the government oppresses its people, but the book also borrows ideas from the greek myth of theseus and the minotaur.

divided into 12 districts, ruled by an oppressive government located at the  capitol. katniss everdeen, a 16-year-old girl from district 12, takes her younger sister’s place as one of 24 “tributes” selected every year to participate in the hunger games at the capitol.

while i found this book absolutely enthralling, i was surprised it was aimed at an audience of young adults. it seems extremely intense for anyone younger than 16 or 17. for example, there is a scene where one young tribute is slowly eaten alive by wolf-like creatures all night long, and katniss has to finally throw a weapon at him to end his misery. i found this a little too disturbing when i considered the age of the character.

the intensity of the action was something one would find in a more mature book, but the age of the characters and the simplicity of the prose were aimed at a much younger audience. in addition, this book was written in present tense, which i found annoying, but that’s more of a personal preference than a stylistic fault. it was also edited somewhat poorly, but that rarely distracted from the plot. for example, the author often spoke in sentence fragments to describe how katniss felt, which might have been an attempt to reflect on her thought process, but i found it disorienting to read a lot of really short sentences all together. it would have been better to vary the sentence length on occasion, but the story was still coherently.

overall,  the hunger games  was an excellent, enthralling read that i highly recommend. if it was more clearly marked for older teens, it would have been better, but it was a fantastic book with a wonderfully creative plot.

happy to .

pls mark as brainliest.

in the quotation from passage, connie willis states that literature is a way for authors from the past to communicate with readers of today. we can read their stories, books, and other texts to learn lessons about life. willis refers to these lessons as messages “from beyond the grave.” willis has a favorable viewpoint about the timelessness of literature.

im not 100 percent sure but i think its a

yes as the core issue is an ever increasing majority of human workers   will become permanently unemployed as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines inevitably replace more expensive human workers with each passing year.

economic growth now and in the future requires that fewer jobs are created for human workers. this is the desirable inevitable consequence. the automation of the jobs of human workers is the most profitable economically productive activity on the planet.

so as a global society we need to have a plan to deal with this inevitable change.

automation has been, is and will always be a friend to human society if human society on a global basis is prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

what is key is that automation killing all jobs is only a matter of when not if.

the real question is can we get past the now invalid assumption that most humans can work for a decent wage going forward.

i spent my working career increasing automation and increasing efficiency. this consequently reduces the hours worked by humans while increasing the output economic goods and services at an ever decreasing price.

why not have ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines create the vast majority of required economic goods and services as opposed to human workers?

why not have most human workers working less and retiring earlier?

there is much more to life than working forever.

fortunately, automation has been going on for decades and will continue as an irreversible process as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines permanently replace more costly human workers.

i write this answer for the people that have an open mind and are not living in the past this is what i feel most effectively deals with the tractable issues that automation creates.

the question at hand is how we deal with automation going forward as a society.

automation is only a threat because society has yet to acknowledge automation is happening let alone effectively a having a plan to address it.

a conservative libertarian free market idea where individuals choose what economic goods and services are produced in the free market as the free market supply will respond to free market demand. this is not a centrally planned communist economy.

it is yes as the core issue is an ever increasing majority of human workers   will become permanently unemployed as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines inevitably replace more expensive human workers with each passing year.

economic growth now and in the future requires that fewer jobs are created for human workers. this is the desirable inevitable consequence. the automation of the jobs of human workers is the most profitable economically productive activity on the planet.

so as a global society we need to have a plan to deal with this inevitable change.

automation has been, is and will always be a friend to human society if human society on a global basis is prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

what is key is that automation killing all jobs is only a matter of when not if.

the real question is can we get past the now invalid assumption that most humans can work for a decent wage going forward.

i spent my working career increasing automation and increasing efficiency. this consequently reduces the hours worked by humans while increasing the output economic goods and services at an ever decreasing price.

why not have ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines create the vast majority of required economic goods and services as opposed to human workers?

why not have most human workers working less and retiring earlier?

there is much more to life than working forever.

fortunately, automation has been going on for decades and will continue as an irreversible process as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines permanently replace more costly human workers.

i write this answer for the people that have an open mind and are not living in the past this is what i feel most effectively deals with the tractable issues that automation creates.

the question at hand is how we deal with automation going forward as a society.

automation is only a threat because society has yet to acknowledge automation is happening let alone effectively a having a plan to address it.

a conservative libertarian free market idea where individuals choose what economic goods and services are produced in the free market as the free market supply will respond to free market demand. this is not a centrally planned communist economy.

hope this