梅州紧致提拉面部(梅州微管可视人流) (今日更新中)

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Sacramento State University has accidentally accepted 3,500 wait-listed students for fall admission.The Sacramento Bee reports that the students were mistakenly invited to Admitted Students Day after an email was sent in March welcoming them to the event.Officials say the school never rescinded the invitation, which implied the students were accepted.University officials say the error resulted in an additional 500 students who began classes this semester.Officials say there would be space to admit them, because the school initially admitted a conservative number of students and it noted a record number of graduates last year.Officials say they don't believe that the additional students would have an effect on students' ability to take classes in their department.University officials estimate a 1% enrollment increase. 862

SACRAMENTO (KGTV) -- California's attorney general disclosed an ongoing probe into Facebook's privacy practices Wednesday, as it sued the company over its repeated refusal to turn over documents and answer questions.California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said his probe has been going on for more than a year. He said he was disclosing it now because his office was making a public court filing to force the company to comply with subpoenas and requests for information."Facebook is not just continuing to drag its feet in response to the Attorney General's investigation, it is failing to comply," the lawsuit said.The lawsuit was filed in state Superior Court in San Francisco.The California probe, one of many legal and regulatory inquiries into Facebook, began as a response to the Cambridge Analytica scandal and grew into an investigation into whether Facebook misrepresented its privacy practices, deceived users and broke California law.Cambridge Analytica, a data mining firm, gathered details on as many as 87 million Facebook users without their permission. The Federal Trade Commission fined Facebook billion this summer for privacy violations in an investigation that also grew out of that scandal. California officials say questions have been raised about what Facebook knew and why it didn't prevent third parties such as Cambridge Analytica from misusing user data.The court filing said Facebook hasn't given answers on 19 of the attorney general's questions and hasn't given any new documents in response to six document requests. The filing also said Facebook has refused to search the emails of top executives Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg, as the state requested.Becerra's office said it requested additional information after Facebook took a year to respond to an initial subpoena.Investigators sought communications among executives on developers' access to user data, the relationship between ad spending and access to data and the introduction of new privacy features and privacy-related news stories. Officials also sought information on the effects of privacy settings on third-party access to data and Facebook's enforcement of policies.Facebook, which has its headquarters in Menlo Park, California, didn't respond to requests for comment.California hadn't joined a separate probe involving attorneys general from New York and other states. The New York probe is looking into Facebook's dominance and any resulting anticompetitive conduct. California is also a holdout in a separate probe into Google's market dominance.The District of Columbia and Massachusetts have also gone after Facebook on privacy. The Massachusetts attorney general's office is set to argue in a state court Thursday why Facebook should be compelled to stop resisting and turn over documents for its investigation.Facebook's various legal troubles have yet to make a significant financial dent on the company. Even the FTC's billion fine, the largest ever for a tech company, came to just under one-tenth of Facebook's revenue last year. The penalty was criticized by consumer advocates and a number of public officials as being too lenient.___AP Technology Writers Mae Anderson and Frank Bajak contributed to this report. 3248

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California has already moved to automatically expunge the records of those convicted of qualifying marijuana crimes. Now, Democratic lawmakers and advocates want to erase the records of those who have served their time for other crimes.The lawmakers and dozens of supporters rallied in sweltering heat Tuesday supporting two Assembly-approved bills that would automatically expunge arrest and conviction records for an estimated 1 million residents who are already entitled under existing law because they have completed their sentences and supervision."Right now, if you serve your time you still can't get housing, you still can't get work, you still get treated like a criminal," said San Francisco Assemblyman Phil Ting, who authored one of the bills.His bill would require the state attorney general to catalog qualifying arrest and conviction records of lower-level felonies and misdemeanors so they can be cleared. That's similar to a law that took effect Jan. 1 requiring the attorney general to identify by July 1 those who are eligible to have their records scrubbed because California legalized recreational marijuana in 2016 and made the reduction in legal penalties retroactive.Supporters of Ting's bill and a related bill by Oakland Assemblyman Rob Bonta said the current expungement system is too cumbersome and too few take advantage even if they qualify. They count more than 4,800 California legal restrictions on those with convictions."Every right should be restored," said state Sen. Nancy Skinner of Berkeley. "Once you've done your time, that's enough."Jay Jordan, executive director of the nonprofit Californians for Safety and Justice that organized the rally, said he served eight years in prison for a robbery he committed at age 18, and still bears the consequences 15 years later."I can't sell real estate, can't sell used cars, can't sell insurance, can never adopt, I can't coach my son's Little League team, can't join the PTA, can't chaperone him on field trips," he said. "It just harms people. It doesn't make economic sense, doesn't make public safety sense."A state association of law enforcement records supervisors opposes the bill, saying it would be costly and burdensome when people can already petition to have their records expunged. Legislative analysts said the bills could cost tens of millions of dollars, though Jordan said that would be offset by the economic benefits of letting more former felons get jobs.The bills awaiting consideration in the state Senate would "unnecessarily put the burden on records management personnel, who are short staffed and without sufficient resources, to move arrest dispositions to an automated system, a very labor intensive and cost-prohibitive task," objected the California Law Enforcement Association of Records Supervisors, Inc. The group fears it would also create a legal liability for agencies that inadvertently miss a qualifying record.The lawmakers propose to use technology that can search for qualifying records, which Ting said can greatly reduce the time and cost. 3099

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KGTV) -- As Californias head out to vote, many important propositions and measures are on the ballot this November.One of those initiatives is Proposition 16.If approved, Prop 16 would repeal Proposition 209 from the state constitution which, according to BallotPedia, banned the use of affirmative action involving sex or race-based preferences.Those in support of Proposition 16 argue that it takes a step toward “dismantling structural racism and sexism.”Meanwhile, those opposed to the proposition point to Prop 209 as to why voters should mark "no" on the ballot. “The state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin, in the operation of public employment, public education, and public contracting,” the website states in reference to a passage from Prop 209.See what a vote for or against Proposition means below, according to the state's voter guide:YES: A YES vote on this measure means: State and local entities could consider race, sex, color, ethnicity, and national origin in public education, public employment, and public contracting to the extent allowed under federal and state law.NO: A NO vote on this measure means: The current ban on the consideration of race, sex, color, ethnicity, and national origin in public education, public employment, and public contracting would remain in effect. 1452

ROCHESTER, N.Y. (AP) — The mayor of Rochester says reforms are coming to the police department as community elders seek to bring calmer minds to a fifth night of demonstrations over the March death of Daniel Prude, who lost consciousness after police held a hood over his head. Mayor Lovely Warren announced that the crisis intervention team would move from the police department to the city’s department of youth and recreation services at a news conference Sunday. Police Chief La’Ron Singletary said he supports the need for reform and is working with experts and clinicians in getting services for people with mental health issues that bring them into repeated police contact. More than 1,000 protesters gathered for a march led by community elders in Rochester Sunday night. 787

来源：资阳报