Believe it or not, carburetors are better at atomizing the fuel mixture at full throttle conditions compared to injectors.

Since airflow through a engine at wide open throttle is fairly well known, and easy to meter for, the carb can be adjusted to precisely match that and get the desired air-fuel ratios.

Injectors can have trouble delivering large quantities of fuel at wide open throttle. When the duty cycle of the injector exceeds about 85-90%, it starts to have problems metering fuel correctly, and the coil starts to overheat. So the typical solution is to drop in larger injectors so a shorter duty cycle can be used.

The other part of the issue with injectors is the short amount of time they have to deliver and atomize the fuel. The fuel is sprayed against the closed intake valves moments before the intake valves opens. The heat from the valves helps to vaporize the fuel. Since there's only so much heat, and only so much air in the intake port, not all of the fuel may be completely vaporized. The incoming air then has only a bit of time to attempt and vaporize what is left before the valves closes and combustion occurs.

So why do we use fuel injectors? Because they excel at the thing carbs suck at, part throttle atomization. Injectors can easily meter out a precise amount of fuel determined by the amount of air entering the engine according to it's sensors. A carb has to deal with what it sees across the venturi which isn't as sensitive at part throttle conditions. Toss in the complicated dynamics of the air inside the plenum and it's hard for carbs to precisely meter out fuel.

That would have to depend on the nature of the crime. White collar crimes in general does not involve DNA. While Robbery, assault etc have some chance of involving DNA evidence.

Some percentage of criminals are likely to commit another offense. This would in a sense help deter further crimes as well as make it easier to place them at the scene if they commit another offense and leave behind DNA evidence.

The purpose of collecting DNA is to make it easier to identify and prosecute them if they commit another offense, as well as link them to other unsolved crimes. If they haven't done anything illegal in quite some time, say sentence + probation + 10 years, then it's probably fine to remove their DNA from the records. However the chances of that actually happening is probably unlikely with an overzealous criminal justice system.

The shortcomings of the current penal system is a whole other can of worms and stands to be improved upon.

"Let my count my old calculators from grade school "

*facepalm*

Yep. Commercial yeasts for brewing and winemaking are essentially self limiting. Commercial yeasts have figures which indicates the amount of alcohol they can tolerate before they start killing themselves. They don't go back and metabolize the alcohol. You can either allow them to poison themselves, or introduce an agent that kills the yeast if you want to reach a target residual sugar or alcohol %, or to ensure that it is dead and not just dormant.

All of the above.

So... what would it cost to break, say a 4096 bit RSA key? Oh, they can bill my grandkid's estate.

You need to look and see where they are getting their funding from. They may be paying for it through bonds, grants, etc that can only be used for very specific purposes, and not for the teacher's salaries, etc.

Trecares

2K pages is nothing really. We have a HP 4200 that has several hundred thousand pages printed and it's only needed the scheduled maintenance to replace the fuser and other stuff once. It still prints the same as it did the day we got it. We get about 15-20K pages before the toner needs to be replaced.

2K pages on the other hand might be something for a inkjet printer. That printer you have is rated to handle 12K pages a month. Coincidentally, it does have a microchip. I don't know if it's to prevent third party units or just to track page usage.

Homer Simpson: NOOOOOO my secrets!

No no, I rolled my eyes because the seat would be comfortable at the start of the flight, but at the end, I'd be sitting on the frame :( Passengers who weight more will generate greater pressure on the seat and thus deplete their fuel first. An incentive to lose weight?

No, the most efficient point is at peak torque. That's where the engine is able to produce the most energy for a given amount of gas. The horsepower peak is where the engine is producing the most power (energy/time). It is not necessarily it's most efficient point unless they coincide which is rare.

Crocodile Dundee? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0090555/