Comment on
Britain Admits Defeat in Controversial Fight to Break Encryption
Reply in thread
Exhibit B: Voting Tories into power for the last 13 years
Comment on
Britain Admits Defeat in Controversial Fight to Break Encryption
Reply in thread
Exhibit B: Voting Tories into power for the last 13 years
Comment on
Female surgeons sexually assaulted while operating
Reply in thread
I could do the same for your comment
But will you?
Comment on
Is ProtonVPN worth it?
Reply in thread
Air vpn too. I had a bit of back and forth swapping between proton and air vpn after Mullvad closing port forwarding. Protons spilt tunnelling is far better than air vpn, but their speeds were appalling so eventually I stuck with air vpn with a script to divert only the torrent traffic through the vpn. Man do I miss Mullvad!
Comment on
Wait, giving a fuckton of money to the people with a fuckton of money didnt work?!?!?!?!?!?
Well, colour me surprised as fuck
Comment on
Sometimes I marvel at how much my rolling skill has improved over the years.
Roll it with the roach in first and roll the paper round the roach first - percent every time!
Comment on
The Chats – Smoko (2018)
That was fucking class!
Comment on
Sunak refuses to rule out welcoming Farage back into Tory party
He'll be back, and I'd wager as leader if he can be more fucking ridiculous than the lady beaten by a lettuce
Comment on
LOL
Reply in thread
Now the Supreme Court is debating over whether “and” means “and” or “or"
Sorry, European here - what the actual fuck?
Comment on
Oh no the poor millionaires
Reply in thread
Exactly
Comment on
LOL
Reply in thread
That was well explained and blows my mind a court is wasting any time on that.
Here we have the convention when drafting legislation that the conjunction 'and' at the end of a list it means all things in the list- so A, B, and C. Whereas if 'or' appears, it means a choice from the list.
I get that maybe once upon a time there needed to be clarification in the courts, but that cannot me the first time such a drafting approach has been taken in legislation in the USA and so an interpretation must have been established already?
I can see why contextually there could be room for either interpretation, but it's astonishing a consistent interpretation hasn't been established.
Comment on
'We are in a war,' Netanyahu says after Palestinian militants launch surprise attack
Reply in thread
The same thing we called the last apartheid state the west took an interest in?