TranscendentalEmpire

You guys are looking at the wrong thing. Airports have their own set of bullshit rules. According to the government choosing to fly automatically implies consent to be searched. Domestic flights have more protections, but international flights basically wave your right to privacy under the 4th.

They only require explicit consent or probable cause if they want to do an advanced or forensic search of your phone. You can deny the search if you're a citizen, but if you choose that option they can take your phone into custody for several weeks to attempt to crack it if they choose to do so.

Unfortunately according to the federal government you automatically consent to limited 4th amendment protections when you choose to fly. Domestic flights have more legal protections, but international flights basically wave your right to privacy.

They are allowed to ask for your phone's password and do a "non-forensic" search of your phone for just about any reason. A more extensive "forensic" search where they plug your phone into another device can be made if they present reasonable suspicion. If you refuse a search they can hold onto your phone for several weeks.

The smarter move would have been to just refuse to give the password and trust that they wont want to go through the hassle of cracking your phone once it's in custody.

Basically the only real way to protect yourself is to not keep any incriminating information on your phone. The courts have ruled that these searches only extend to data that can be physically accessed on your device and things like social media and cloud storage are not subject to the search. So it's just best to save everything on the cloud and then restore it once you are done traveling.

The only one mentioning "breaking China's hold" is you in this thread.

Did you not read the article you posted?

You have also referenced competing with China several other times in this thread......

insecure about "Chinese dominance"

It would be nice if there were something to be insecure about. That would personally benefit me as I live in the US. I would welcome an influx of production based employment, but we're too busy giving tax breaks to oil tycoons.

Chinese troll farm employee even if I don't take into consideration your quite telling username.

Lol, you are a fucking idiot. Transcendentalism is a philosophical movement that began in the US in the late 1820's. Please enlighten me......what is so telling about my username?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt since it seems like English isn't your first language.

Finding sources of rare earth minerals is easy. Mining those resources is easy. Processing those minerals into actual usable material is the complicated and expensive part. Investing in that part of the process is how China cornered the market.

So claiming a new mining company is going to break China's hold over the rare earth material market is incredibly stupid.

All of these raw materials are found all over the place. They aren't exactly rare, they are just rare when compared to something like iron. The reason China dominates these fields isn't because of their mining capabilities, it's their processing facilities. They invested billions of dollars on the infrastructure when most western countries refuse to invest in themselves because rich people refuse to pay taxes.

Any company claiming they've found a mining source that can make any country a dominant producer is just trying to attract VC funding.

Technically you can sue anyone for anything. Whether you're going to win a judgment, or be rewarded more than you spend winning is a different question.

the analysis excluded minor incidents involving Waymos that would likely not have been reported to the police had a human been driving,”

I feel like this is a pretty glaring flaw in the study..... They got to redefine what they consider to be a collision and ended up negating nearly 80% of the reports. Something tells me they didn't comb through the data from human reports and do the same.

That's a claim made by Herodotus, though in his telling he really only claims he ran to sparta from Athens in two days and made his way back at some point. He was also famous even in his own day to make up stories and greatly exaggerate for dramatic effect, and his story is from 40 years after the events occurred.

In reality, it really doesn't make sense for one runner to do the whole trek. Ancient greece was famous for having a relay system of runners to deliver important news, similar to the pony express, but without the ponies. It would have been a lot faster and more secure to use the relay system instead of having a random unheard of dude do the whole run.

That's a fictional retelling popularized by Robert Browning in the late 1800s of three different accounts from more contemporary authors.

That's because the legend is most likely a mix of fictional accounts. The one you are thinking of is the story recounted by Lucian of Samosata around 600 years after the events and is a romanticized retelling of a story by Plutarch from a 100 years before.

The one the person who responded to you claiming that he ran like 500km is an even more fictional account from 1874. From an author that combined stories from 3 different more contemporary but still likely fictional accounts.

So honestly you are more correct than the vast majority of the people on this thread.

Yeah.... Even contemporary writers would constantly criticize him for mixing fantasy into his writing for entertainment purposes.

Nah, that misconception was popularized in the late 1800s and is basically a tall tale based on several other tall tales.