广州胰腺肿瘤好的医院南昌介入治疗手术费用,广州纳米刀肿瘤医院,湖南肺癌医院,南昌市出名的胰腺癌医院,清远市看肝癌的医院哪个好,广州肺癌晚期能够治好吗,福建治疗结直肠癌多少钱

Some of the biggest brands in the U.S. had ads running on the YouTube channels for far-right website InfoWars and its founder, notorious conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, and they say they had no idea YouTube was allowing their advertising to appear there.Last week, YouTube reprimanded the conspiracy theory site and Jones for violating its community guidelines after a video posted to The Alex Jones Channel, InfoWars' biggest YouTube account, claimed student anti-gun activists were actors.Now YouTube and Jones' channel on it are in the spotlight again. CNN has discovered ads on InfoWars' channels from companies and organizations such as Nike, Acer, 20th Century Fox, Paramount Network, the Mormon Church, Moen, Expedia, Alibaba, HomeAway, Mozilla, the NRA, Honey, Wix and ClassPass.Even an ad for USA for UNHCR, a group that supports the UN refugee agency UNHCR, asking for donations for Rohingya refugees was shown on an InfoWars YouTube channel.Many of the brands -- including Nike, Moen, Expedia, Acer, ClassPass, Honey, Alibaba and OneFamily -- have suspended ads on InfoWars' channels after being contacted by CNN for comment. The companies, with the exception of Alibaba, which declined to comment, said they had been unaware their ads were running on The Alex Jones Channel. CNN discovered the HomeAway advertising shortly before publishing this story, and has not yet received a response from that company.InfoWars and Jones are known for peddling conspiracy theories, including the false idea that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, in 2012 was a hoax.The brands purchased ad campaigns from YouTube, which is owned by Google, or through marketing companies that broadly targeted demographics and user behavior. Companies that purchase ads this way don't necessarily know where their commercials will eventually show up, but they can use exclusion filters to avoid having them appear on certain channels and kinds of content.Several brands expressed concern about the ads' placement to CNN and said they have reached out to YouTube about the situation.A Nike spokesperson said the company was "disturbed to learn that we appeared on [The Alex Jones Channel]." It has since asked YouTube to address why the channel wasn't flagged by a filter it had enabled.Nike, like some of the other brands, opted in to a "sensitive subject exclusion" filter to better control where its ads appear. The exclusion filters include, according to YouTube: "Tragedy and Conflict;" "Sensitive Social Issues;" "Sexually Suggestive Content;" "Sensational & Shocking;" and "Profanity & Rough Language."YouTube did not respond to questions from CNN about whether the channels should have been excluded by any of those filters."We have a filter and brand safety assurances from Google our content would never run around offensive content," a Paramount Network spokesperson said, adding that the company is trying to find out what "went wrong."An Acer spokesperson confirmed the company also had reached out to its partners at YouTube, saying its "existing filters should have prevented this." The spokesperson said the company has set up additional filters to further block its ads from appearing on "divisive channels in the future.""We take great measures to ensure our ads do not run on videos with sensitive content," a spokesperson for Grammarly, an online grammar-checker tool, told CNN on Friday. It was aware their ads had run on an InfoWars channel, the spokesperson said, and had been working closely with YouTube to ensure it didn't happen again.A half hour after it sent CNN that statement, Grammarly ads were still running on an InfoWars YouTube channel. Its ads were also running on a YouTube channel that did not appear to be explicitly affiliated with InfoWars, but reposted InfoWars videos.A Grammarly spokesperson said on Saturday the company had not been aware of the ads. "We have stringent sensitive subject exclusion filters in place with YouTube that we believed would exclude such channels. We've asked YouTube to ensure this does not happen again."CNN has asked YouTube for further comment, but has not yet heard back.Honey, a company that finds discounts for shoppers online, told CNN it unknowingly spent 9.64 to promote its brand on the Alex Jones YouTube channel. Honey said its first video ad appeared on the channel on January 21 and that eventually its ads on the channel received about 300 plays per day."[It] clearly was outside of our expectations [that this would happen by] using their sensitive subject exclusions tool," Honey co-founder Ryan Hudson told CNN.The company's ad continued to play on The Alex Jones Channel until Wednesday, when CNN asked if it had any comment on why the ad was running there.A spokesperson for 20th Century Fox said the company was unaware its ad had been placed on an InfoWars YouTube channel and after learning it had, immediately took it down. The company believes that it existing filters should have prevented it showing on the InfoWars channel.The company is now having further conversations with YouTube, the spokesperson said, "to make sure this never happens again," and has asked for a refund.A spokesperson for Mozilla told CNN, "We have explicit exclusions set up for our YouTube campaigns and should absolutely not have appeared alongside this content. We are disappointed to learn that YouTube's filters are not as effective as promised in preventing advertisements running alongside objectionable content. We've since reached out to Google and paused our advertising on the channel."A spokesperson for USA for UNHCR said that this was the group's first time running ads on YouTube, and that it would now pull its ads from all of YouTube, and has asked for money spent on InfoWars-related channels back.And a spokesperson for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints told CNN it has paused the specific ad campaign that ran on an InfoWars YouTube channel, and are looking into whether other ad campaigns are similarly affected.Related: USA Today publishes op-ed by InfoWars conspiracy theoristCompanies can prevent their ads from appearing on any channel, at any time, by adding those channels to their account's "blacklist." Some of the companies CNN spoke with said that when they purchased ads on YouTube, they specifically included some of InfoWars' YouTube channels on their "blacklist," but that they were unaware InfoWars had other YouTube channels.These moves come nearly a year after YouTube suffered an advertiser backlash when brands learned their promotional posts were appearing alongside extremist content.Late last year, YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki said the service would take steps to ensure advertisers "that their ads are running alongside content that reflects their brand's values."YouTube declined to comment on InfoWars and content similar to it not being flagged by the "sensitive subject exclusion" filter but emphasized its commitment to being "an open platform.""We uphold free expression according to our Community Guidelines, even when there are views we don't agree with," a YouTube spokesperson said. "When videos are flagged to us that violate our guidelines, we immediately remove them. We do not allow ads to run on videos that deal with sensitive and tragic events."Honey is currently "investigating options with Google" to recover the money it spent.It's unclear if Jones has specifically profited from the ads. YouTube allows channels with over 1,000 subscribers and 4,000 annual watch hours to be monetized. At least seven out of the 11 InfoWars-related YouTube channels fall into this category, including the Alex Jones channel.A source with access to YouTube's Creator Studio management system said the videos on the Alex Jones channel are claimed by Jones' media organization Free Speech Systems, LLC. Depending on which policy an advertiser selects, a share of the money it pays YouTube could go to Jones' company.Infowars did not respond to a CNN request for comment.In the meantime, UK-based financial company OneFamily said it "alerted Google to recommend they add [The Alex Jones Channel] to their own blacklist." 8185

Some presidential campaign promises are guaranteed to affect the lives and finances of everyday Americans. Banking industry reforms may not seem like one of them.After all, banking regulations can appear to be pretty remote from your day-to-day financial transactions. You may be surprised to learn that bank reforms implemented by past presidents and their cabinets have had material impacts on regular folks, and there’s no reason to believe that any regulatory changes brought about by a second Trump term or a Biden presidency would be any different.Here’s what you need to know about how presidential politics have affected your bank accounts in the past, and how the outcome of the 2020 election could affect your banking experience in the future.Historical Banking Changes That Continue to Affect ConsumersPresidential administrations of the past have implemented a number of different banking regulations and rule changes that continue to impact the consumer experience in 2020. It’s important to remember that the following banking changes were decided, in part, by the voters’ choosing the president who implemented the changes.Creation of the Federal ReserveInaugurated in 1913, President Woodrow Wilson signed The Federal Reserve Act into law later that same year. Prior to the creation of the Federal Reserve, banks could not count on any emergency reserves if customers all withdrew their funds at once.Such panic withdrawals were relatively common in response to widespread financial crises. The country plunged into a depression in 1907 after a big panic run on the banks led to the failure of several institutions.The Federal Reserve Act established the Federal Reserve System as the U.S. central bank, which not only serves as a lender of last resort to commercial banks that would otherwise go under during an economic crisis, but also supervises and regulates banks to provide a level of safety and soundness. The Fed also sets monetary policy to help ensure full employment and price stability.We’re still feeling the effects of Wilson’s policy every day. Due to the stability offered by the Federal Reserve, only two banks have failed in 2020, despite this year’s pandemic-related economic troubles. Compare this to the more than 600 bank failures per year between 1921 and 1929, prior to the Great Depression.Even more importantly, the Fed sets the federal funds rate, which is the benchmark interest rate for the entire U.S. economy. (It’s also the amount of interest banks charge each other for loaning money overnight to maintain their reserve requirements.) The federal funds rate is currently set at 0% to 0.25%.Financial institutions use the federal funds rate to set the interest rates they offer on interest-bearing accounts, such as savings accounts, CDs and money market accounts. When rates on these accounts are raised or lowered, it’s in part because of how the Fed has set the federal funds rate.The federal funds rate also may affect the rates financial institutions charge on loans, such as mortgages, auto loans, credit cards and the like. However, individual credit history and other factors also can affect these rates.Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the Banking Act of 1933 into law within his first 100 days of taking office. This legislation, which is often referred to as the Glass-Steagall Act after its sponsors, Senator Carter Glass (D-Va.) and Representative Henry B. Steagall (D-Al.), set up the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), among other provisions.The FDIC insures deposits at an individual bank for up to 0,000 per depositor, for each account ownership category. If your bank were to fail, the FDIC ensures that you would not lose your deposits, up to the applicable limits. As the FDIC proudly states on its website, “No depositor has ever lost a penny of insured deposits since the FDIC was created in 1933.”Few people spend much time thinking about FDIC deposit insurance, but it has had a stabilizing effect on consumer behavior. Prior to the passage of Glass-Steagall, banking customers did not feel confident that their money was safe in the bank, and so they would withdraw their deposits when concerned about an economic downturn.In fact, a rumor that Roosevelt would devalue the dollar caused panic and mass withdrawals in January and February of 1933, leading to the failure of 4,000 banks by the time his March inauguration arrived. Such panicked withdrawals feel unthinkable in 2020 because of the assurance provided by the FDIC coverage.Federal (and many state-chartered) credit unions enjoy similar protection through the National Credit Union Administration, or NCUA.Regulation CCIn 1987, under Ronald Reagan’s administration, Congress passed the Expedited Funds Availability Act to establish the maximum length of holds that banking institutions can place on deposits by their customers.This federal law established Regulation CC, which sets specific rules as to when various types of deposits will be made available to banking customers and provides guidelines to financial institutions for how to disclose their funds availability policies to their customers.Regulation CC specifies that banks can hold their customers’ deposits for a “reasonable” amount of time. The definition of reasonable depends partially on the size of the deposit and the origin of the funds. Still, checks written from an account within the same bank may be held up to two business days, while checks drawn on other banks may be held up to five business days.Banks also may impose longer holds, but they have the burden of proving that the longer hold is necessary and reasonable.Prior to the implementation of Regulation CC, there was concern about the length of time that banks held onto their customers’ deposits before the money appeared in their accounts. With these regulations in place, customers know what to expect from their deposits, making it far easier to handle their cash flow.Proposed Banking Policies in the 2020 ElectionBoth President Donald Trump and Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden have proposed policies that could alter your banking habits. Here’s what to expect from each candidate’s proposed banking policies.Continued Deregulation Under Donald TrumpThroughout his first term, the incumbent has made bank deregulation a major part of his legislative agenda, with the rollback of some Dodd-Frank regulations in 2018 being his signature achievement in banking. Among other loosened rules, the Dodd-Frank rollback also raised the threshold under which banks are considered “too big to fail” from billion to 0 billion.While the president has not made his proposed banking policies a significant part of his reelection platform, he did propose major changes to the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) as of January 2020. The CRA is legislation that prevents banks from discriminating against low-income or under-represented borrowers.As of June 2020, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) put the Trump administration’s proposals into effect. These proposals broaden the definition of what constitutes a bank and expand what types of loans offered to low-income borrowers qualify for improved CRA ratings.Specifically, it now includes credit cards and personal loans. In addition, the new rules give financial institutions credit for community reinvestment for loans for things like stadiums and hospitals. Should the president win his reelection bid, we can expect these new rules to take effect. (However, even if he wins and there is a change in leadership in the Senate, it is possible Democrats will work to reverse these rule changes.)The average bank customer may not notice the changes to the CRA on a day-to-day basis. However, lower-income borrowers may find it more difficult to qualify for a mortgage once these rules take effect.Updates to Older Legislation Under Joe BidenThe former vice president has plans to spruce up several pieces of old banking legislation. The specific items on his agenda include actions to:“Strengthen and enforce” the Dodd-Frank Act to help ensure equal access to banking. He specifically plans to back criminal penalties for reckless actions by bank executives.Protect consumers from predatory lending practices. Biden plans to strengthen consumer lending oversight, enforce remedies for abusive lending practices and pursue legislation to prevent predatory lending.Expand the CRA to include mortgage and insurance companies.Presuming it can enact all the plans it promises, a Biden presidency may provide banking customers with more reassurance that banks will handle their finances with care. Consumers may pay less for their personal loans, credit cards and mortgages if Biden is successful in ending predatory lending practices and if he is able to expand the CRA, thereby improving access to credit for under-represented communities.These rule changes also may place more of a regulatory burden on financial institutions, which could have ripple effects on banking customers. For instance, some consumers with a poor credit history may find that they cannot qualify for loans under a Biden-led crackdown on usurious interest rates, although they did previously qualify for loans that are now considered predatory.Election Costs and ConsequencesPolicy changes from our government’s executive branch can have enormous consequences for the banking industry and the consumers who rely on that industry. Although it may feel as if voting in a presidential election has little to do with how you bank, your vote can help to set policies that will affect banking consumers like yourself for decades to come.Protecting your own and your fellow Americans’ financial health is yet another reason why voting is so important. 9828

SpaceX’s test flight of its next-generation Starship rocket was deemed a success, despite a bit of an explosive landing.As part of the launch, SpaceX attempted to perform a “flip landing” of the rocket. Although the flip landing resulted in the rocket blowing up, the finish was not unexpected.“Lot of things need to go right, so maybe 1/3 chance,” SpaceX founder Elon Musk said last month about the odds of the rocket nailing the landing.The rocket’s mission was not to leave Earth’s atmosphere, but to test several parts of the Starship rocket.“This suborbital flight is designed to test a number of objectives, from how the vehicle’s three Raptor engines perform to the overall aerodynamic entry capabilities of the vehicle (including its body flaps) to how the vehicle manages propellant transition. SN8 will also attempt to perform a landing flip maneuver, which would be a first for a vehicle of this size,” SpaceX said before the flight.SpaceX said even if not everything went correctly, there would be plenty to learn from this test to improve on future flights.“With a test such as this, success is not measured by completion of specific objectives but rather how much we can learn, which will inform and improve the probability of success in the future as SpaceX rapidly advances development of Starship,” SpaceX said.Musk deemed aspects of the launch a success.“Successful ascent, switchover to header tanks & precise flap control to landing point!” Musk tweeted.The rocket remained airborne for over six minutes, and it was slated to reach an altitude of 41,000 feet. 1591

Southwest Airlines says it has canceled roughly 1 per cent of its scheduled flights as it carries out inspections prompted by an engine failure that led to a passenger's death last week. About 40 flights were impacted.The affected Southwest Boeing 737 took off Tuesday morning from New York, headed for Dallas. About 20 minutes into the flight, at about 32,500 feet, a fan blade broke off the engine and shrapnel shattered a window.Jennifer Riordan, 43, and a mother of two, was almost sucked out of the broken window and pulled back inside by fellow passengers. She died from blunt force trauma at a hospital after the plane's emergency landing in Philadelphia. 670

Some San Diego voters are making a surprising - and alarming - discovery in their mailboxes.They are receiving duplicate mail-in ballots for the November midterm. "Obviously with such a contested election and everything in the news right now, was this actually something bigger?" said April Segal, a Hillcrest resident who received two ballots.Nearly 70 percent of voters in the county say they will vote via the postal service this November. People from Hillcrest to Tierrasanta to Escondido have reported receiving the extra ballots. San Diego Registrar of Voters Michael Vu said there are protections in place to make sure everyone gets one only one vote. He said duplicates are not uncommon and this year is a bit worse than others because of issues with the new voter registration system at the DMV. "Our office and the statewide system runs duplicate checks to determine matches or potential matches," Vu said. "When a duplicate record is identified, the record is merged, with the most recent registration becoming the official record."Vu said no matter which ballot a person submits, it will ultimately be counted. He said anyone who knowingly submits two ballots would be referred to the district attorney for an investigation of voter fraud. Segal said she recently got married, changed her name and registered to vote. A few months later, when applying for a Real-ID at the DMV, she checked the 'yes' box when it asked if she would like to register to vote. That likely led to the duplicate ballot. "I knew I already was registered, but I thought I should just err on yes so that nothing got messed up by saying no," she said. Segal said she would continue to vote by mail, despite the mix-up.  1758