Those are very small pieces of graphine. It is more like the tiny industrial diamonds that were initially produced. Most of graphine's use is when larger sheets can be made.

Note necessarily. There are many jurisdictions that have "truck routes" where trucks that are not making local deliveries are allowed to drive. There are also hierarchy of streets. When secondary/tertiary streets are being used like primary streets then things get changed. Secondary/tertiary streets are narrower/windier than primary streets. There are many secondary/tertiary streets that are restricted to local traffic only. Do you really think it is safe for commuters who are trying to get to work as fast as possible to be routed through a residential area?

Actors sign release forms such as these;

Actors in effect sign over their rights as they pertain to the movie. One of those right is copyright. Without a valid release copyright to the actor's image is retained by the actor. The DMCA allows copyright holders to have they property taken down. She is not "going after" Google but Google is going after her. She filed a DMCA and the courts agreed with her position. Now Google is appealing the decision.

This just shows how little you actually know how the DMCA works. Google does not have to track down anything. The procedure is as follows.
1. Google received a DMCA take down request.
2. Google takes the video down and informs the poster.
3. The poster files a counter claim with Google.
4. If the person that filed the take down request does not provide proof that they have filled a case in court the material goes back up.
Google does not "judge" anything. It is up to the courts to do that. Few people would go through this process unless they had a chance in court as they could be assessed court costs and defendant fees.

Listen up Chicken Little, the DMCA has been around for a while and the internet is still here.

Because these people with the intent to do terrorism might find someone who will supply them with actual bombs. It is much the same way people are caught hiring hit men when the hit man is actually a police officer.

I said nothing about "Freedom of Speech". I don't see how you comment applies to the validity of a legal release.

I think the heart of the issue is That she signed a release for one use but the film was completely different that what she was told. To me it would seem that any release she signed would be invalid and she would have the same rights as someone who did not sign a release. Any film maker would know that everyone in the film must sign a release.

This is based on a couple of assumptions;
1. That taxi drivers are not already "scraping by". I drove taxis and "scarping by" is normal operating procedure.
2. That a living wage can be made by switching to Uber. Most Uber drivers are doing it to make extra money. They are already making a living wage in their main job. The issue is that you are spreading out the same taxi money over more drivers so very few can actually make a living wage driving taxi any more. There have already been strikes over falling fares and unfair working conditions.

Wait till the Uber meme wears off and there are fewer Uber drivers on the road. Hopefully this will happen before taxi companies are driven out of business and the availability of taxis becomes worse than it already is.

I had to uninstall a patch last week to get Virtualbox to work. Can't remember which one it was.

"Intensive purposes" is a malapropism caused by miss-hearing something and then repeating what was thought to be heard. There are many examples in music such as "Slow walking Walter. Fire engine guy" which is actually "Smoke on the water, Fire in the sky". Try to justify it any way you want but it is still an example of incorrect usage. Much like using 'who' where 'whom' is the correct word.

Even your justification falls far short as "purposes" and "properties" are very different things therefore "Intensive purposes" have nothing at all to do with "intensive properties".

That should be "intents and purposes" not "intensive proposes". To answer the question, those that care are the ones to whom proper English is important.

From this post here are some interesting images.
The Damage. Those are new lines created by Greepeace. Notice the bright line to the left. That is where they drove their cars off the existing roads. I guess walking a bit is more important than preserving an international heritage site.
The Foorwear This is what they should have been wearing to visit the lines. It spread out the weight and causes less damage. They did the worst thing possible by walking in a line in regular shoes.

The stupid part was that this could actually have been done with little or no damage at all had the activist just followed some basic rules when dealing with the area.
1. No not walk in other's footsteps.
2. Wear the foot square pads on your feet to spread out your weight.
3. Do not bring cars to the site.

Had they done some basic research they may not have had a problem. The activists did note care about the damage they did.

Would you say the same think if Greenpeace put a big banner across Mount Rushmore and parts fell of due to them driving in pitons?

If it is surface tension then horizontal surfaces should smooth out as well but they do not. Another problem is that thin areas will distort as the plastic is softened. Sure acetone smoothing is acceptable for larger solid items but that still greatly restricts what can be made.