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.
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.
You (and one of the ACs) are making the assumption that the cameras make errors independently. But the cameras don't make the decision, the central server does. There's only one of those, and if the data it has on a target happens to look like a different person, it will flag the data from all of the cameras in the same way. The fact that they all agree doesn't reduce that component of the 0.1% error rate.
That's 200 false matches to each of the 100 targets. 200*100 = 20000.
Intellectual property isn`t knowledge, it`s various forms of monopoly rights. Copyright is a monopoly right to make copies. Trademarks are a monopoly right to use certain forms of signs. Patents are monopoly rights to make use of various inventions.
The idea of monopolies as goods that can be traded is a little abstract, but it`s similar to lots of other contracts. If you deposit money in a bank, they only need to return it to you because of an abstract concept of ownership. Nothing really changed hands in most cases, you and the bank just agreed on a contract.
That's just not true. I wouldn't consider Fox News to be news media, but it's certainly conservative media. And this is on the front page of their web site.