Depends on where you are driving and how well timed the lights are. Living in a smaller town, beating the timed lights or the delay after a waiting car signals a change can be very beneficial. The worst case is that you wind up moving forward as soon as everyone else. Best case you get an extra green light.

As usual a purely physics based approach assumes a lot of variables. It takes me little thought to imagine many problems with this, I live in Oklahoma and this situation isn't rare. The described deceleration is assuming the cubic object is traveling on a friction-less surface that hits a static object at a known rate in an inelastic collision. So many more variables. Vehicle flips, vehicle spins and takes out the 2-3 vehicles behind it, vehicle is bumped into a guard rail or bridge support and has a very very rapid rate of change in velocity. Or a truck is jarred and the shotgun in the back seat shoots too many holes in your assumptions.

Yes, control systems can react much faster than humans; however, the statement "The car behind will apply maximum braking force the very moment a single cycle of it's control loop happens (probably 1/1000 or a second or so)." is almost patently absurd and shows a best a limited understanding of tuning a control loop. Yes, a reaction will happen within a single cycle, and yes 1kHz is reasonable, but assuming maximum braking force is assuming it is only a proportional control that is tuned to be highly reactive. I would challenge anyone to ride in a car that has a purely proportional control that would react as described. You'd sue me for whiplash.

A few things. First, rifles will be used to shoot down a drone; a shotgun has no chance of hitting it. Second, while unsettling, it isn't all that uncommon for hunters to get 'rained' on while bird hunting with falling shot. The pellets lose too much energy when shot up into the air to be lethal.

You clearly know nothing about shotguns.

"Even though Abrams' last known direct contribution to Lost was the script to the season 3 premiere, "A Tale of Two Cities" (which he co-wrote with Damon Lindelof), and he had stopped being the main driving force behind the direction of the show as early as season 1, instead leaving Lindelof and Carlton Cuse as the showrunners, a considerable part of the (casual) audience still considers Abrams to be the man in charge of the show." http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/J.J._Abrams

They had this technology at the turn of the previous century as shown here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JDaOOw0MEE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjxY9rZwNGU

This would do no more than to make people unlock their home defense and self defense weapons daily. If the one day you forgot something happened, then you'd be frantically swiping a sweaty finger across a fingerprint scanner that is already mediocre to begin with. RFID seems the best option in terms of securing personal weapons, but this isn't necessarily the problem when looking at fixing mass shootings. This assumes the owner isn't the mass murder type. The reality is that so much of our comfort and security in life revolves around people acting under the normal confines of society. Someone could kill dozens of people driving to work in the morning by forcing people off the road for example.

I suppose there is room for various interpretations here.

That does not address the fact that the summary states that conductivity does not change as the wire is stretched.

so shouldn't this alter the conductivity of the 'wire'? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistance_and_conductance#Relation_to_resistivity_and_conductivity

[citation needed] in the parent. Intuitively it seems ludicrous that reducing production would decrease the marginal cost.

Apparently you didn't catch the joke. The parents are misspelling 'Nimoy' as 'Nemoy'.

Write off's only save you whatever you would have paid in taxes on that money. You've still spent the money. It's not like write off's magically pay for themselves. Given the fact that business lines are significantly more expensive and the fact that you can write off a consumer line there's not really a point.

Peak usage in water pipes hasn't skyrocketed over the past few years. You can reliably predict the water consumption of X households for the next decade or more, not true with our ever increasing demands for wireless data.