  There are various non-equivalent definitions of locality. Three of them,
impossibility of instantaneous communication, impossibility of
action-at-a-distance, and impossibility of faster-than-light travel, while not
fully implying each other, have a large overlap. When the term non-locality is
used, most physicists think that one of these three conditions is being
violated. There is a minority of physicists, however, who uses "locality" with
a fourth meaning, the satisfaction of the hypotheses underlying Bell
inequality. This definition devoids Bell's theorem of its profoundness,
reducing it to a mere tautology. It is demonstrated here, through a classical
example using a deck of cards, that this latter definition of "locality" is
untenable.
