That is why he is the prosecutor and not the judge.

Prosectuors are still officers of the court and aren't allowed to make unconstitutional arguments to the jury.

"Four of the five individuals who have access to control the camera's settings will testify they did not change the cameras' recording instructions," prosecutors wrote. "The fifth person is defendant. It is a reasonable deduction to infer that defendant tampered with the camera equipment to have an opportunity to insert a thumbdrive into the RNG tower without detection."

So according to these prosecutors, taking your fifth ammendment right to remain silent == automatically guilty despite lack of evidence.

I'd rather have vacuum.sucks

Yeah, why would a robotics company want to be near Carnegie Mellon University?

Welcome to jonny cab. Please state your destination?

According to the novelization, they just go through a worm hole and come out the other side near habitable planet, and everything between is just them hallucinating because of that gravity messing with their brains.

So is Apple going to close its South Asia headquarters in Singapore, where homosexuality is a felony punishable by 2 years in prison?

Or do they not actually care about civil rights and are just trying to hook onto their customer base's current "cause of the week" in a cynical attempt to get good PR?

A Christian baker should not have to bake a wedding cake for a gay "marriage". Likewise, should a muslim photographer be forced to photograph it?

But an atheist baker has to indulge a Christian cashier who think company policies don't apply to them. Because Evangelicals are fine with forcing involuntary service on everyone else.

Ketchup Won't Stay In Bottle

So like you open the lid and a fountain of ketchup immediately geysers out of the bottle?

At least when titans of industry in the U.S. become the head of the regulatory agencies that oversee their former companies, they actually have to leave those companies.

The ESRB isn't a regulatory agency; it has no actual official power whatsoever.

For example Steve Jobs was known to park in handicapped spots and drive around without license plates.

Under California law, when you buy a new car from a dealer, there is a six month grace period to give you time to get license plates for it.

Steve Jobs literally bought a new car every six months so that he never had to actually get license plates for any of them.

DNA fingerprinting isn't completely unique. Now when used the normal way, testing someone who has come under suspicions for other reasons, a match may be unlikely enough that it has evidential value. But when the you reverse the process ("get me anyone in the country who matches this DNA whether we have any reason to suspect them or not"), there's a good chance of going after an innocent party as that group is going to have a number of people in it, all but one of whom is innocent.

Okay, the "most" was a bit hyperbolic, but it my point still stands that the publishers of academic journals have long been against open access long before this. They've fought hard against FRPAA (Federal Research Public Access Act) and the NIH Open Access Policy for years for the same reasons. So it's not out of bounds to point out that ASA has a conflict of interest here.

The ASA makes most of its revenue by charging large amounts for access to closed academic journals. Of course they're opposed to open access laws.

What's weird about making the data from scientific studies publically available? Frankly, I think the data from all government funded research should be public domain.