There are lots of conflicting reports. There is also forensic evidence. Read the grand jury testimony that was released. Is there really enough supporting guilt over and above that establishing doubt of guilt that there's a chance an impartial jury wouldn't find reasonable doubt on Wilson's behalf?

That's what a grand jury does. They decide if it's worthwhile to try the case based on 9 or more of 12 deciding that there is probable cause to believe a crime has been committed. The didn't indict because they didn't find it met that standard.

If the grand jury can't meet their standard, what are the chances of getting 12 of 12 to agree that the evidence supports a much higher standard: beyond a reasonable doubt?

If they are sure there's going to be an innocent verdict at trial then why try the case?

Read the grand jury testimony and then say they failed given what they had to work with. Does the standard for charging Darren Wilson really seem to be met after you've read it?

Technically some Olympic events or others happen every two, but the same events don't repeat but every four.

Not all of them are working on the domestic spying. The NSA, believe it or not, was created to spy on other countries, not Americans.

Is the 12-point boost in IQ permanent or does it fade over three months like the primary effects of the training?

If you can't play multi-player with your friend on another platform then who cares which one of you has better graphics? Are you people more concerned with e-peen rants than about being able to play the game together? How many of you are buying a platform based on this title? I'd much rather buy titles that let me play with my friends no matter who has what hardware.

Perhaps he's bored by children his own age. MAybe a mix of 5-9 year olds. He needs to stay stimulated but also learn to be pleasant to people his own age.

If you get worked into a frenzy by whichever moment the media chooses to show, you'll be always frenzied about different types of moments. If you care about the actual issue, stick with the issue and care about the moments with no coverage too.

Media attention is like a fickle middle schooler with ADD. The problem won't go away when the media attention does. The only way to impact this issue is by accepting it's of a bigger scope and addressing it over the longer term.

Why is gamergate (which is a horrible name, BTW. Not everything has to be paralleled to the GOP's break-in to a Democratic headquarters that happened in the 19 fucking seventies for fuck's sake) the big focus of all that is wrong with threats and misogyny on the Internet?

This is a more general problem with more general roots than anything to do with the principle actors in this situation. You blame the people attacking this particular journalist at this particular time for picking their target specifically when there's in general a bigger problem in gaming journalism. I'm simply saying that beyond this one case of targeting specific people, there are other cases of "doxxing" (another loathesome word, by the way), threats, and general misanthrophy/misogyny/misandry all over the Internet.

Getting these 4chan dwellers and other trash to leave these specific women alone is a victory, but it's a small and isolated one. Convincing a generation of maladjusted young men (and yes, it is mostly boys and young men although they target both men and women) of the terrible distastefulness and inappropriateness of their words and actions should be the long-term goal.

It's bad, but it's not exclusive to women. Anyone who hangs out in the filthy sewers of the Internet (4chan, parts of Reddit, many newspaper and magazine comment sections) knows that threats of beatings, killings, and rapes are common. They are commonly laid out against men by men. Yes, that includes rape. Most of it is idle posturing by mouth-breathing basement-dwelling mental juveniles many of whom are chronological juveniles as well.

Could we please focus on the anti-social, violent nature of these threats and not label the entire Internet as misogynist pigs just because women are finding themselves included as targets?

The FCC is not Congress. It's an executive department under the aegis of the President, who is the chief of the Executive Branch. The courts already basically said the FCC is free to categorize ISPs as common carriers unless Congress passes a law to stop it. Read the Ars article about it.

If they declare ISPs to be common carriers, then they can apply common carrier regulations on them. The problem with parts of the Open Internet Order was that they were applying common carrier regulations to ISPs without classifying them as common carriers beforehand. The FCC is free to do so under current laws. They just haven't done it.
 

Points on Slashdot are rarely mute, although they are sometimes moot.

Right now, if you don't like your Internet service, you often have to keep it. That includes if they discriminate based on who is sending you data.

ISDN was broadband. You could band as many PRIs together as you chose. One BRI to an office, well, that wasn't broadband. 30 or 40 PRIs muxed off a fiber was. A DS3 was. An OC-12 definitely was.