<h2>
Answer:</h2>
<h3>
<em>Further,</em><em> </em><em>PII </em><em>is </em><em>define</em><em> </em><em>as </em><em>information</em><em> </em><em>:</em></h3><h3>
<em>(</em><em>i)</em><em> </em><em>that </em><em>directly</em><em> </em><em>identifies</em><em> </em><em>an </em><em>individual</em><em> </em></h3>
<em>(</em><em>e.</em><em>g</em><em>.</em><em>,</em><em>name,</em><em>address,</em><em> social</em><em> security</em><em>,</em><em> number</em><em> </em><em>or </em><em>other</em><em> </em><em>identifying</em><em> </em><em>number </em><em>or </em><em>code,</em><em> telephone</em><em> </em><em>number</em><em>,</em><em>email </em><em>address,</em><em>etc.</em><em>)</em><em> </em><em>or </em><em>(</em><em>i</em><em>i)</em><em> </em><em>by </em><em>which</em><em> </em><em>an </em><em>agency</em><em> </em><em>intends </em><em>to </em><em>identify</em><em> </em><em>specific</em><em> </em><em>individuals</em><em> </em><em>in </em><em>conjunction</em><em> </em><em>with</em><em> </em><em>other</em><em> </em><em>data </em><em>elements,</em><em> </em><em>i.</em><em>e</em><em>.</em><em>,</em><em> </em><em>.</em><em>.</em><em>.</em>
<h2>
Explanation:</h2>
<h3>
<em>I </em><em>Hope</em><em> It's</em><em> Help</em></h3>
<h2>
<em>#</em><em>C</em><em>a</em><em>r</em><em>r</em><em>y</em><em> </em><em>On </em><em>Learning</em></h2>
<h2>
<em>_</em><em>_</em><em>_</em><em>_</em><em>M</em><em>s</em><em>c</em><em>u</em><em>r</em><em>a</em><em>t</em><em>o</em><em>r</em><em>5</em><em>7</em></h2>
The correct answer
alterations in glutamate levels can produce schizophrenic like symptoms in normal subjects.
The correct answer is personalization.
This is a type of fallacy where you involve somebody's personality into an argument, even though it is completely unnecessary or wrong to do that. For example, if you are going to a dinner party and you are late, and the dinner is overcooked (completely unrelated to you being late), you might start thinking that it happened because of your tardiness, whereas that is obviously not the case.
Answer:
Reasons why slavery is bad
Although slavery does seem 'obviously wrong' it's worth listing some of the reasons why it's wrong.
- Slavery increases total human unhappiness.
- The slave-owner treats the slaves as the means to achieve the slave-owner's ends, not as an end in themselves.
- Slavery exploits and degrades human being
Explanation:
Answer:
European explorers searched in vain for the Northwest Passage, a waterway that would allow them to sail through North America to Asia. This would be a shorter, more direct route to Asia. Columbus reaches the Americas for the first time.
