There is a difference between science and technology. Science is a method of answering theoretical questions; technology is a method of solving {#blank#}1{#/blank#} problems. Science has to do with discovering the facts and relationships {#blank#}2{#/blank#} in the observable natural world and with building up theories that serve to organize these facts and relationships; technology has to do with tools, techniques, and methods for carrying out the {#blank#}3{#/blank#} of science.

    Another difference between science and technology has to do with the {#blank#}4{#/blank#} in each.

    Progress in science does not consider the human factor. Scientists make a study of the universe, try to explain the rules of nature and strive to find out the truth. They can {#blank#}5{#/blank#} pay attention to their own or other people's likes or dislikes or to popular ideas about the fitness of things. What scientists discover may shock or anger people—as did Darwin's theory of evolution. But even a(n) {#blank#}6{#/blank#} truth is more than likely to be useful; besides, we have the choice of refusing to believe it! But hardly so with technology; we do not have the choice of refusing to hear the noises produced by an airplane flying overhead; we do not have the choice of refusing to breathe {#blank#}7{#/blank#}air; and we do not have the choice of living in a non-atomic age. Unlike science, progress in technology must be {#blank#}8{#/blank#} in terms of the human factor. Technology must be our slave and not the {#blank#}9{#/blank#}. The purpose of technology is to serve people in general, not merely some people; and future generation, not merely those who presently wish to gain advantage for themselves. Technology must be {#blank#}10{#/blank#} if it is to lead to a better world.

    The elementary means of communicating with other people is conveying messages by voice. This fact is widely acknowledged and we recognize the voice as a(n) {#blank#}1{#/blank#} characterizing the identity of a person. The array of voices is immeasurable as no two are exactly similar. They can be nasal, resonant or shrill produced in accordance with the individual physical {#blank#}2{#/blank#} of the throat.

    One possible implementation of the {#blank#}3{#/blank#} of voice recognition is voice profiling used by police analysts as a method of substantiating court evidence in trials. Every year, thousands of audiotapes with recorded interviews or {#blank#}4{#/blank#} utterances are put to the purpose to help identify the probable {#blank#}5{#/blank#}. Specialists dealing with the voice investigation claim that people can give themselves away by their {#blank#}6{#/blank#}, inflections or other voice attributes like pitch, intensity and loudness. A recorded sample is usually {#blank#}7{#/blank#} into electric impulses and later transformed into a pictorial recoding which is processed by a computer program. Very frequently voice analyst have a stake at deciphering the relevant information which may be {#blank#}8{#/blank#} with background noise or other interfering sounds until they attain the {#blank#}9{#/blank#} results.

    Thankfully, these efforts help the police detect individuals who threaten their victims by phone or inform about bomb {#blank#}10{#/blank#} or those who make offensive calls disturbing the peach of decent citizens.