Unless you're in a large enough crowd and there are more than one of you assholes. Then scattering through that group, while they're too busy being traumatized by an imminent death, is quite doable. Also, who looks at the shouter if the person is in the act of committing suicide? Isn't everyone transfixed in horror at watching death unfold? Honestly, some /.'ers bother me with their lack of understanding where people are looking in stressful events.

Well, there you have it folks. Forming the building blocks of proteins means nothing.

Give the opposition against Obama, can you blame them? It's like deciding between a lunatic and an asshole who screws you over every time. No win.

Some people think up the most retarded things. They never consider that everyone else, at some point, has their own desires, problems and interests.

It's funny how you cite policies endorsed by the Nazis while comparing homosexuals to Nazis.

And this is why people like Colbert have an assured job.

Because idiots like you will always take it to an extreme over putting a label of numbers onto some object. As if more consumer awareness is bad.

Elaborate why, genius.

Unless the act of clearing them constitutes an act that deprives them of their natural rights, or it can be shown that the process of detaining them until a full inquiry is fundamentally unjust, then I see no issue.

It would be no different a rationale than keeping suspects who've been arrested for suspicion of murder in jail until some form of bail (if allowed) is posted.

Stalking someone is often a prelude to assault, robbery and/or murder. In any case, it is not only a provocation, but a direct threat to the subjects safety. While it does not give a right to attack, hindering someone's movements such that they DO have to pass through you or near you would, under most courts, be at your fault.

The fact that you have to argue for the right to stalk and threaten other people while defending someone who stalked and ultimately killed a youth is sickening to say the least.

That's what a lot of Zimmerman apologists/shills even on /. here fail to account for.

Going out armed at night, without anything to identify yourself differently from a guy who wants to mug you, and following/stalking someone with (or without) their knowledge should not entitle you to Stand-your-ground.

Zimmerman walked out looking for a fight and took steps (like not being/wearing garb of a neighborhood watch association, pursuing Martin, etc) to enforce a confrontation. He should be investigated thoroughly at a minimum.

Anyone who advocates differently from doing other than at least a thorough investigation should have their biases checked. We need more facts, not police agencies willfully obfuscating cases just because they're lazy.

Right there you see Zimmerman following Martin. Another word would be stalking. The 9-11 operator told him not to engage. Any currently tested law applies only if the victim attempted to retreat and was otherwise forced into a confrontation where they had to protect their life.

Voluntarily stalking someone who probably knows you are stalking them is not what comes to mind for 'justifiable homicide'. But hey, anything to feed your fantasy of being neighborhood policeman instead of leaving it up to the police, eh?

It's almost like you're expecting the West to behave better. :P

Gooogle has censored themselves so they can do business with foreign powers. I even recall them working with China and changing search results there for sometime. I don't really care much about that stuff anymore; my love affair with Google died a long time ago.

Any who, here is the obligatory "Get your head out of your ass." message:

Why should the UK and US be any different in dealing with Google?

And what makes you think they will?

Welcome to Slashdot, where belief outweighs *inconsistencies* in science,

Neutrinos being superluminal would make them arrive *significantly* sooner than we've observed in stellar collapses.

This makes an interesting problem -- is our understanding of stellar collapse incomplete or wrong, or is OPERA's interpretations incomplete or wrong?

That's assuming a simplistic model of a fault as storing energy. And that also assumes that the energy, in this assumed model, is significant to decrease the overall fault. I'm not sure of the former and extremely skeptical of the latter, particularly because I was under the impression that each scale up is many times more powerful than the former. So a small earthquake might really do jack shit for a large one, except perhaps to loosen or tighten the segments for an enormous quake...

Yes... By making reconstituted (ie fake) proteins into patties!

One way or another, this fake meat is getting in the food supply.

The only reason why universities are so damn expensive is because shitwits like you shriek about "How overpaid the professors are" and "how much money goes to universities" when federal and state funding is at an all time minimum.

Because of that, universities seek corporate and alternative funding sources. But idiots like you are far too wrapped up in your masturbatory crusade of "It's too expensive!" to notice things ARE expensive because they're FORCED to find OUTSIDE funding. The kind of funding that comes wrapped with heavy baggage, corruption and cronyism -- hey! It's the best system that money can buy...

And now, because out of state students are a financial gold mine, the UC system is focusing on admitting more. Why? Because the entire university system is strapped for cash, raised fees and still found itself strapped for cash. So it did the next reasonable thing -- beg for more cash, give up when the begging failed, and instead change the ENTIRE point (California universities are no longer for Californians) of the system. All to survive.