济南睾丸可以转动济南早泄有什么办法可以延长时间,济南男科泌尿专科医院,济南勃起不坚插不进去怎么办,济南啪啪啪时间很短,济南怎么来治疗早泄,济南男性阳痿危害,济南包茎是什么样子的

The CEOs of Twitter, Facebook and Google are facing a grilling by Republican senators making unfounded allegations that the tech giants show anti-conservative bias.The Senate Commerce Committee has summoned Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Google’s Sundar Pichai to testify for a hearing Wednesday. The executives agreed to appear remotely after being threatened with subpoenas.With the presidential election looming, Republicans led by President Donald Trump have thrown a barrage of grievances at Big Tech’s social media platforms, which they accuse without evidence of deliberately suppressing conservative, religious and anti-abortion views.The chorus of protest rose this month after Facebook and Twitter acted to limit dissemination of an unverified political story from the conservative-leaning New York Post about Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, an unprecedented action against a major media outlet. The story, which was not confirmed by other publications, cited unverified emails from Biden’s son Hunter that were reportedly disclosed by Trump allies.Beyond questioning the CEOs, senators are expected to examine proposals to revise long-held legal protections for online speech, an immunity that critics in both parties say enables the companies to abdicate their responsibility to impartially moderate content.The Justice Department has asked Congress to strip some of the bedrock protections that have generally shielded the tech companies from legal responsibility for what people post on their platforms. Trump signed an executive order challenging the protections from lawsuits under the 1996 telecommunications law.“For too long, social media platforms have hidden behind Section 230 protections to censor content that deviates from their beliefs,” Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., the Commerce Committee chairman, said recently.In their opening statements prepared for the hearing, Dorsey, Zuckerberg and Pichai addressed the proposals for changes to so-called Section 230, a provision of a 1996 law that has served as the foundation for unfettered speech on the internet. Zuckerberg said Congress “should update the law to make sure it’s working as intended.”“We don’t think tech companies should be making so many decisions about these important issues alone,” he said, approving an active role for government regulators.Dorsey and Pichai, however, urged caution in making any changes. “Undermining Section 230 will result in far more removal of online speech and impose severe limitations on our collective ability to address harmful content and protect people online,” Dorsey said.Pichai urged lawmakers “to be very thoughtful about any changes to Section 230 and to be very aware of the consequences those changes might have on businesses and consumers.”Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd told congressional leaders in a letter Tuesday that recent events have made the changes more urgent. He cited the action by Twitter and Facebook regarding the New York Post story, calling the companies’ limitations “quite concerning.”The head of the Federal Communications Commission, an independent agency, recently announced plans to reexamine the legal protections, potentially putting meat on the bones of Trump’s order by opening the way to new rules. The move by FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, a Trump appointee, marked an about-face from the agency’s previous position.Social media giants are also under heavy scrutiny for their efforts to police misinformation about the election. Twitter and Facebook have slapped a misinformation label on content from the president, who has around 80 million followers. Trump has raised the baseless prospect of mass fraud in the vote-by-mail process.Starting Tuesday, Facebook was not accepting any new political advertising. Previously booked political ads will be able to run until the polls close next Tuesday, when all political advertising will temporarily be banned. Google, which owns YouTube, also is halting political ads after the polls close. Twitter banned all political ads last year.Democrats have focused their criticism of social media mainly on hate speech, misinformation and other content that can incite violence or keep people from voting. They have criticized Big Tech CEOs for failing to police content, homing in on the platforms’ role in hate crimes and the rise of white nationalism in the U.S.Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have scrambled to stem the tide of material that incites violence and spreads lies and baseless conspiracy theories.The companies reject accusations of bias but have wrestled with how strongly they should intervene. They have often gone out of their way not to appear biased against conservative views — a posture that some say effectively tilts them toward those viewpoints. The effort has been especially strained for Facebook, which was caught off-guard in 2016, when it was used as a conduit by Russian agents to spread misinformation benefiting Trump’s presidential campaign.The unwelcome attention to the three companies piles onto the anxieties in the tech industry, which also faces scrutiny from the Justice Department, federal regulators, Congress and state attorneys general around the country.Last week, the Justice Department sued Google for abusing its dominance in online search and advertising — the government’s most significant attempt to protect competition since its groundbreaking case against Microsoft more than 20 years ago.With antitrust in the spotlight, Facebook, Apple and Amazon also are under investigation at the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission.___Follow Gordon at https://twitter.com/mgordonap. 5687

The calendar just turned to November but some companies are already in the Christmas spirit. Starbucks and McDonald's have already released their 2017 holiday cups.Starbucks scrapped its traditional red design for a DIY cup. There's a stack of presents, a Christmas tree, doves, two people holding hands and lots of white space. Customers are encouraged to color the cups themselves.  412

The charges against one of the three men in connection to a viral video of a shark being dragged behind a boat from July 2017 have been dropped.A Hillsborough County (Florida) judge dropped two felony counts of aggravated animal cruelty (third-degree felony) against Spencer Heintz Tuesday morning.According to the judge, the state dropped the charges because no evidence showed that Heintz, 23, broke the law and because he agreed to testify as a witness.Heintz, 21-year-old Michael Wenzel and 28-year-old Robert Lee Benac were all charged after a four-month-long investigation into the graphic video of a shark being dragged behind a boat.At this time, it is unknown if the charges against Wenzel and Benac will also be dropped.Wentzel and Benac still face the following charges: 824

The Carr Fire raging in Northern California is so large and hot that it is actually creating its own localized weather system with variable strong winds, making it difficult for experts to predict which way the blaze will spread.At least seven people were still missing in Shasta County, California, as shifting winds, dry fuel and steep terrain helped the monstrous fire engulf almost 100,000 acres by Sunday night, authorities said.The fire has claimed six lives, including a firefighter and bulldozer operator working to extinguish the blaze.Sixteen people had been reported missing, but nine of those have been found safe, according to Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko, who spoke at a Sunday news conference.The fire, which started a week ago, has burned 98,724 acres and is just 20 percent contained, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, known as Cal Fire.Flames have destroyed at least 966 structures in the area, making it one of the top 10 most destructive wildfires in California history. In fact, 7 of the 12 most destructive fires have happened since 2015.PHOTOS: See damage done by Carr Fire in California"We are seeing more destructive, larger fires burning at rates that we have historically never seen," said Jonathan Cox, Cal Fire regional Battalion Chief. 1321

The forensic pathology industry is facing a workforce shortage. These are the men and women who determine how and why a death happens. They are being overwhelmed, and the pandemic has only made things worse.“What you’re seeing now is part of our autopsy examination room,” said Francisco Diaz as he walked around the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner in Washington D.C. He is the deputy chief medical examiner.“The purpose of the medical examiner is to do two things, to determine why people die and to classify the manor of death,” he said.Diaz and his team have their hands full. Here, bodies are brought in, x-rayed, and analyzed every day. Most of them are bodies of those who have died of unnatural causes, like homicide, suicide, and certain accidents.They’re brought here, where seven forensic pathologists work.“As medical examiners and forensic pathologists you are dealing with death and tragedy every single day,” he said.This year the volume has been higher than usual, in large part because of the COVID-19 outbreak. “The peak of our pandemic was April, May. At that time we had that emergency morgue off campus,” Diaz explained. “We handled approximately 400 descendants or dead bodies.”The increase in autopsies needed is not only due to COVID-19 directly, but other ripple effects.“What I see as a consequence of the pandemic is a lot of people are dying at home because they choose not to seek medical attention because they may have concerns that they may get contaminated at hospitals,” Diaz said.If they die at home, they’re sent straight to D.C.’s Medical Examiner’s Office. Most people who die in a hospital are handled by the hospital, except for in certain jurisdictions like D.C. where they will help out with the hospital's cases as well.Regardless of where the cases are coming from, jurisdictions are strapped for resources. It’s a problem across the industry right now -- one that’s been facing a workforce shortage for years.“A lot of the policy makers think that it's a waste of money. You're just spending money on the dead, but everything we do is for the living,” said Victor Weedn, Forensic Science Professor at George Washington University. He’s an expert in the forensic pathology industry.“We are terribly undermanned, under served these days. It is thought we have 500 to 600 board certified forensic pathologists working in the field across the United States and that's simply not enough. It’s estimated we really ought to have 1,200 to 1,500 forensic pathologists.”The lack of workers has become more evident due to the pandemic, and also a growing epidemic. “And then the opioid crisis hit. That immediately caused 10% to 30% more cases because of all the overdose deaths,” Weedn said. “On top of that you have the COVID pandemic. The overdose cases have not declined, in fact they've continued to increase. And now we’re seeing a wave of homicides increasing our caseload still further. We are facing a true workforce shortage.”Weedn also talked about how some of their investigations on COVID-19 patients who passed helped answer some questions we had early on in the pandemic.Increasing a workers caseload is not a great option, according to Weedn. The National Association of Medical Examiners has accreditation standards.“A forensic pathologist really isn't supposed to do more than 250 autopsies a year. If you have more than that it’s considered an infraction of the standard,” he said. “When you start doing more than that, things get lost. Details get lost.”This puts many offices in a bind. “In the face of such a severe workforce shortage you find that people have changed the criteria for what deaths they will investigate and that means there are certain deaths that will go uninvestigated. A murderer could get away with murder. That’s certainly a possibility,” Weedn explained.As the workload remains heavy for many jurisdictions, Diaz said education and exposure for the industry might be their best bet in getting more interest.“I think every crisis brings an opportunity. And I think this is an opportunity for forensic pathology to be on the forefront and let the public at large know what we do, how we do it, and to encourage young people to pursue a career in forensic pathology,” Diaz said. 4266