According to Wikipedia, desalination costs about $1 to $5 per m^3, or about $0.11 to $0.55 per barrel. So $10/barrel doesn't seem "comparatively cheap".
29C in your heart would be a big problem, but 29C in your extremities (which the GP was talking about) is not that unusual. Don't you know anyone who has cold hands or feet sometimes?
Blood is quite conductive as well, being salty water with a bunch of other junk in it.
How can that company not be a patent troll?
I don't think that there's any doubt that they are. Unfortunately, and I think most people don't really grasp this, being a patent troll in the United States is not just legal, it's extremely lucrative. That's why, while I certainly hope that Newegg eventually successfully appeals this case and continues defending against patent trolls, what we really need is better legislation to make all of this shit illegal.
NewEgg stands up to patent trolls.
Amazon... well, one-click.
This. Exactly. I'd rather pay Newegg a few bucks more knowing that those bucks will be spent fighting patent trolls than saving a few bucks at Amazon knowing that the reason they're able to offer prices a few bucks lower is because they sued some other company out of existence for having the audacity to put a button on their web page that charges your credit card and checks you out in one action.
Not surprisingly, the submitter grossly misrepresented what was said. In TFA, the Arial font thing was just a couple of lines in a much more troubling string of rants, stuff like:
- "it’s always awkward when I see one of my pervs in the parking lot after a hearing"
- he (the hearing examiner) “likes taking motions under advisement, but gets greater satisfaction denying them”
- On November 20, 2008, the day of the plaintiff’s hearing, the following comment was posted during working hours: “it’s always a mistake when people testify, because they get destroyed in cross examination”
- On that same day, the day of the plaintiff’s hearing, the hearing examiner also posted the following (apparently with reference to a different sex offender): he (the examiner) “hopes this guy doesn’t show up!!” which was followed up with “Tyson Lynch says yay!! He didn’t show up!”
...And so on. This is someone who is supposed to be fair and impartial, and the guy clearly has issues with the people he has a duty to work with.
So yeah, if I had a hearing before the guy that went south, I'd be trying to have it overturned also. I hope that the guy is fired and the people who did have hearings before him get new hearings.
You're exactly right! I've done tons of "exploratory" coding over the years myself, either using some new techniques or new products, just for the fun of it or to learn something new. But that would always be on small, low visibility projects where the consequences of potential poor performance or other issues would be insignificant. To tread new ground on something so big with national visibility is foolish. You'd want the most well established and known reliable and performant tools and techniques possible. I played around a bit with these object based databases in the early days, and for some uses such as simple dictionary type access to a serialized object they're good. But the query syntax is almost always XPath oriented and less than optimal for complex joins such as you would find in massive systems like this. I guess they've learned their lesson now.
The war might have had the effect of making the British take the Americans seriously, but it didn't cause the end of the blockade or the impressment. The blockade ended before the Americans declared war (though the Americans weren't aware of the decision), and the impressment ended when the war in Europe ended.
The only thing the Americans could have achieved by the war was the annexation of British North America, and they didn't. They didn't lose so badly that they had to give up territory (that's what Plattsburgh and Baltimore achieved), but they still lost.
Two? The British won the war of 1812.
So the day after this announcement, they issue one of those requests.
The FISA court would grant them authority to do so, in order to protect the integrity of the FISA system. They would see the notice itself as grounds to issue one targeting you.
Are you volunteering to be one of the names who promises to quit?
But I'm not trying to prove the cause of the accident. I'm trying to close a case (if I'm a policeman). The other party says "he was speeding, I wasn't" -- and the policeman has proof you were doing 80, but only your word that everyone else was too. You will be found to be at fault.
You mean will I pay more if I'm in an at-fault accident, regardless of speed?
I meant that if were in an accident while speeding, you'd pay more if the monitor was in the car so they had proof you were speeding than if it wasn't. Having the monitor only for a limited time is obviously less risky for you.
Same regarding the police: they'll know if there was a monitor in the car and may request the data in case of an accident. If you were speeding, you're more likely to be found to be at fault if they have proof than if they don't.
Have you made any claims yet? I imagine that when you make a claim while driving over the speed limit, it will come back to bite you. Probably they wouldn't get away without paying, but I'll bet you'll be worse off after the claim than you would with a company that didn't monitor your speed.
I would also guess that the information they collect on you will be available to some other driver who sues you, to the police who ticket you, and to the next insurance company you apply to after you decide to move on.
No, the first party is the user, and the second party is the program the user is running.
Google is not proposing to force Adobe Reader to use Chrome.
How can cutting the premiums of safe drivers work in practice?
They would raise the premiums of bad drivers, or just not accept the bad drivers as customers.
Isn't the idea of insurance that the premiums of those who don't file claims is what pays for the claims of others?
Yes, but that's after taking all predictable differences into account. Even if you are a safe driver, you'll sometimes have accidents just because of bad luck, or accidents caused by others who are uninsured and won't pay for them, or whatever. The other drivers who didn't have the bad luck will pay for you.
Insurance isn't to allow people who engage in risky behaviour to transfer their costs to others.