Rätta eventuella fel i min text.

To determine whether technology is a blessing or a curse is one of the hardest decisions one can make.

It has lead us into the creation of two different categories of positions of views: supporters and opponents.

The supporters makes to think that technology makes life easier and improves our qualities of life. Some of the most important discoveries we have done would not been possible without the usage of technology.

Things like the Internet have changed the perspective we had of distance to other people. Now we can just connect to the Internet and communicate to people who are miles away from us. This is only one of the many examples we could give to prove the fact that technology is a blessing and that our live would not be the same without it.

On the other hand, opponent state that technology creates a bigger problem than the one we were trying to resolve in the first place.

It means that the benefits we could obtain are nothing compared with the damage we have caused. Its purpose is not always meant to solve any problems, but merely to create one.

Let's use the nuclear bombs as an example. They are meant to destroy, to kill innocent people. Even if someone nearly the detonation are able to survive, they will probably be affected by mutations and genetic problems due to the radiation caused by the bomb.

The supporter MAKES?? to think LIFE inte live OpponentS state

Jag vet inte riktigt om du syftar på endast grammatiska fel och stavfel, eller om du även vill ha feedback på meningsbyggnad och styckesindelning, val av ord och så vidare. Din text var ganska välskriven från början, så ta inte min feedback på fel sätt. Här kommer iallafall en ganska petig och genomgående "rättning".

To determine whether technology is a blessing or a curse is one of the hardest decisions one can make.

It has lead us into the creation of two different categories of positions of views: supporters and opponents.

// Hela meningen känns ganska nästlad, framförallt "of positions of views". Vi har väl dessutom inte aktivt skapat två kategorier vilket föreslås av texten. Skulle nästan rekommendera att skriva om hela meningen. Något i stil med(?): It has lead to conflicting views which can be categorized into two groups: supporters and opponents.

Förövrigt kan man väldigt sällan(aldrig?) börja ett nytt stycke med "It has..." då det bygger på något annat, flytta upp under första meningen och ha det som inledning.

The supporters makes to think that technology makes life easier and improves our qualities of life. Some of the most important discoveries we have done would not been possible without the usage of technology.

// the supporters makes, byt makes mot förslagsvis tend.
qualities of life, petigt kanske men låter bättre med " and that it improves the quality of our lives."
we have done -> that have been made låter lite bättre

Things like the Internet have changed the perspective we had of distance to other people. Now we can just connect to the Internet and communicate to people who are miles away from us. This is only one of the many examples we could give to prove the fact that technology is a blessing and that our live would not be the same without it.
// perspective we had --> perspective we have
communicate to -> communicate with
the many examples ganska onödigt "the", fungerar bra med bara one of many examples
we could give får det att låta som att du själv är en supporter, men du har innan dess antagit en subjektiv roll, byt därav till that can be given
our live --> our lives

On the other hand, opponent state that technology creates a bigger problem than the one we were trying to resolve in the first place.
// opponent -> the opponents

It means that the benefits we could obtain are nothing compared with the damage we have caused. Its purpose is not always meant to solve any problems, but merely to create one.
// igen, börja inte nytt stycke med "It"
compared with --> compared to
meant går bra att plocka bort, problems i plural och create one i singular krockar lite, skriva om till(?): Its purpose is not always to solve a problem, but merely to create one.


Let's use the nuclear bombs as an example. They are meant to destroy, to kill innocent people. Even if someone nearly the detonation are able to survive, they will probably be affected by mutations and genetic problems due to the radiation caused by the bomb.

// nearly --> near eller glassigare: in proximity of the detonation

Om jag skriver om hela texten med mina föreslagna ändringar blir det: