That's like saying Raytheon would outsource building drones from Saheed makers (don't know who exactly).

Not gonna happen

> Count 4 - Wire Fraud

I almost always see this charge. Seems too strong as law

Yeah. And the penalties for wire fraud are steep. Up to 20 years in prison and $250k fine _per_ count.

Wire fraud is simply the crime of committing a crime over wire. It just always doubles the counts and intensifies the punishment. Same goes for Count 5.

Wire fraud turns a state case into a federal case.

> China asks other country not to meddle with internal separatism > They also dont support separatism in my country

Understandable.

They arent. Benchmark wise they are quite apart.

> If a txt2vid model could generate a 100% perfect video of a soccer match, perfectly rendering each blade of grass, would anyone watch it? No, because we care about the team and the stories of the players. Not just the spectacle being shown.

But AI would produce hilarious and memeable soccer matches. Those are enough to reserve your attention and waste your time.

The Gulfs would just follow whatever US wished. They also received the grim reminder that US being far away can just go at a moment notice. Iran is there for eternity figuratively speaking. They all need to learn to live together

> China has the same air defense and tech as Iran

Lmao, quantitatively and qualitatively China is more than an order of magnitude bigger

Brent isn't security products so not covered under anti insider trading law right?

STOCK Act should cover commodities futures, so Brent and WTI should be covered.

> Attack Greenland ->attack Denmark, attack Denmark -> Attack the EU.

Rhetoric and public support aside, I honestly very much doubt that there will be a solid EU military response. For many countries like Baltic, Eastern Europe and Nordic countries (ironically DK included). US military support means life or death of their countries. I imagine they'd stall response like what Hungary did and hope that Greenland annexed become fait accompli.

> US military support means life or death of their countries.

Meant. They have begun to realize that this has changed and realize that if this were put to the test that the US military would likely not hold up their end of NATO.

What you wrote would have made good sense in 2015, but today it makes a lot less sense and with every passing day that gap is widening. The Baltics have become the voice of reason and ethics in Europe, Poland is much stronger than parties outside of Europe seem to realize, France is always going to be a force to be reckoned with and we have no doubt about where the UK stands, then there are Finland, Sweden and Norway who all are automatically on the side of anything that Denmark is involved in and I wouldn't be surprised at all if Canada would become part of it, because they too have a lot to lose.

There is a good reason why Putin has not risked engaging the EU and that's not just because the United States is still formally part of NATO.

> they have no moat beyond expertise and some tech advancement that could be replicated easily enough

Incorrect, de facto, the only firms invested heavily in the rare earth refineries technology are Chinese for the last 20-30 years. Their moats are as deep as TSMC moats so to say.