Wouldn't surprise me if they're that stupid tbh

He was wearing his headphones the wrong way around, so the text was mirrored too.

Fsync is also mentioned as having issues when emulating ntsync, and the improvements for some games are still quite good.

Israel is suing the NYT for supposedly breaking US law. That's pretty typical worldwide. Crime doesn't become legal if you do it to a foreigner, you need a special status for that (like ICE goon for example).

Too bad for you, my claim goes back 3001 years. Get in line!

Global consumption compared to what the Earth can regenerate.

To make this determination the court may hear evidence, and must take account of any representations made by the parties.

This did not happen as far as I can tell. Neither are any of the listed examples applicable.

I don't have an answer, but I do know that even the Windows version of MySQL Workbench is pretty ass. Probably doesn't hurt to look into something nicer to use.

Sorry for not having an answer for you though.

It can be both depending on how you handle operator precendence.

PEMDAS definitely doesn't result in 1, but in 9, since under PEMDAS multiplication and division have the same priority (and thus should resolve left-to-right). So, you should resolve to 9 (6/2(2+1) => 6/2(3) => 6/2*3 => 3*3 => 9).

However, there's also PEJMDAS, which suggests that implied multiplication has an operator precedence greater than regular multiplication/division (J for Juxtaposition). This version says you should do 6/2(2+1) => 6/(2*2 + 2*1) => 6/(4+2) => 6/6 => 1.

The issue is that there is no universal agreement on which is correct. Most textbooks don't even use the / operator, but instead rely on writing out the full fraction like ⁶⁄₂₍₂₊₁₎ or ⁶⁄₂(2+1). This removes any ambiguity there might be, and thus they don't touch on which one is actually correct.

Most (but not all) calculators these days will treat implied multiplication the same as regular multiplication, so you get 9 in the given example. Most programming languages do the same, or outright disallow implied multiplication because it only confuses people. Academics won't ever use the ambiguous notation and will make sure to remove any ambiguity by either adding parentheses or using a notation like ⁶⁄₂₍₂₊₁₎, which makes things much more clear.

Neither 9 nor 1 is wrong, the question is just stupid.

But they weren't convicted of terrorism, which has a legal definition. So the judge shouldn't be considering it as an aggravating circumstance since there's no terrorism conviction.

Not necessarily. Economies adapt over time. The greying of the population doesn't happen instantly, it happens over several decades. Economies have survived such things in the past, and they will continue to do so in the future. Standard of living may change for certain groups, but I doubt this requires poverty.