Now thinking about it in terms of mathematical logic, the DoJ and Supreme Court‘s interpretations is wrong:
It’s actually a law of logic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Morgan's_laws) that says that:
not (A and B and C)
is equal to
(not A) or (not B) or (not C)
—
In this case:
The defendant is eligible for relief if he does not (A and B and C)
Which is the same as
The defendant is a eligible for relief if he does (not A) or (not B) or (not C)
—
Which is not what the DoJ is saying. The DoJ is saying that
not (A and B and C)
is equal to
(not A) and (not B) and (not C)
Right! I feel like I’m going crazy because I don’t see how can you interpret it the other way!
lower courts were sharply divided on the vital question of whether “and” bundles the conditions—as in, you don’t have (A), don’t have (B), and don’t have ©—which would mean a defendant who lacked any one of these conditions would be eligible for relief. The alternative reading, advocated by the Justice Department, holds that “and” really means “or”—that a defendant who met even one of the conditions would not be eligible for relief
The reporter seems to be getting this totally wrong. It’s like he is saying the exact opposite of what I understand. From my point of view:
If a defendant would be elegible for relief if he lacked any one of the conditions, that is actually interpreting that AND means OR.
If a defendant would be eligible for relief if he lacked all of the conditions, that is interpreting that AND means AND.
There’s already like seven countries with territorial claims in Antarctica
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_claims_in_Antarctica
Play lots of AAA games
Thing about Arsenal they always try to walk it in
It doesn’t
deleted by creator
Yep, needs more people commenting
We’re best friends and I don’t want to lose him
I like the variant: “Me cago en tus muertos pisoteaos”. I’ll shit all over your treaded-on dead relatives.
Seems to be used in Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay. Being from Spain, I’ve never heard Salami being used as an insult.
So it’s better to stick your loofah in you ass and then put it all over your body?
You can wash your ass with your hands and wash your hands right there in the shower if you think they are so dirty, which they won’t be because they are full of soap and water is running over them
From my Spaniard point of view, there’s three things that I find fascinatingly weird about Americans: Guns, boys’ circumcision and shower loofahs. Why do you need a loofah to wash your body? Do you use a loofah too when you wash your hands?
Other servers do store personal data. Any post or comment made by a user is personal data as it contains the thoughts/ideas of that user.
GDPR Art 4.(1) ‘personal data’ means any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person (‘data subject’); an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person;
GDPR Art 4.(1) ‘personal data’ means any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person (‘data subject’); an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person;
Posts in the Lemmy instances contain information relating to an identifiable natural person (by their user handle), as they contain the person’s ideas and opinions. Therefore the Lemmy instances are handling personal data and must comply with the GDPR.
Centrifugal force does not exist
Whaat?! 🤣🤣 So random!
The only evidence to overturn the election points to republicans