梅州盆腔炎的国内疗法梅州如何治疗轻度附件炎,梅州整形鼻子,梅州可视流产术费用,梅州医院哪里割双眼皮好,梅州急慢性阴道炎症怎么办,梅州薇薇保宫人流多少钱,梅州治疗宫颈炎中心

Even during this time of strong political divisiveness, lawmakers agree there should be changes to Section 230. Congressional committees have subpoenaed the CEOs and heads of major tech companies like Facebook, Twitter and Google multiple times to answer questions about possible bias, eliminating competition, allowing misinformation to flourish, etc., all trying to get to the heart of what should be done about Section 230.So, what is it?Section 230 refers to a section of just 26 words within the 1996 Communications Decency Act.It reads: “no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”This particular section makes it so internet companies are generally exempt from liability for the material users post on their networks.Which means, if a news website article makes false malicious statements about a person, that person can sue the publication for libel. However, if that article is posted on social media and spread to hundreds of thousands of people, the person can only sue the individual who posted the article and cannot hold the social media company responsible for spreading the article.The wording of Section 230 also allows internet companies, and more specifically social platforms, to moderate their content by removing or censoring posts that are obscene, violent or otherwise violate that specific platform’s terms of service and standards, so long as the social platform is acting in “Good Samaritan’ blocking” of harmful content.This has allowed online social platforms to grow and thrive, offering a space for users to share their thoughts and opinions, without the fear that those thoughts and opinions will get the platform in trouble. The wording for Section 230 came from established case law, including a Supreme Court ruling in the middle part of the 20th Century, which held that bookstore owners cannot be held liable for selling books containing what some might consider obscene content. The Supreme Court said it would create a “chilling effect” if someone was held responsible for someone else’s content.“Today it protects both from liability for user posts as well as liability for any clams for moderating content,” said Jeff Kosseff, who wrote a book about Section 230 and how it created the internet as it is today.President Donald Trump in May signed an executive order that would clarify the scope of the immunity internet companies receive under Section 230.“Online platforms are engaging in selective censorship that is harming our national discourse,” the order reads.One of the issues raised in the executive order is the question of when does a social platform become a so-called “publisher” by making editorial decisions about the content on the platform. Those decisions include controlling the content allowed on the platform, what gets censored, and creating algorithms that spread certain content further or faster.Content publishers are held to different rules and responsibilities by the Federal Communications Commission. News publishers can be held liable for the content they share on their platform, either in print or online.The president’s executive order came after Twitter started adding a fact-check warning to his tweets that contain false or misleading information. The executive order does not allow the president to change the law, but rather encourages his administration to take a look at Section 230.Lawmakers on both sides have concerns about how social platforms are abusing the protection they receive under Section 230, and have held several committee meetings.Many experts agree Section 230 cannot just be removed.If social platforms are suddenly held responsible for the content on their sites, there could be a whole new level of moderation and censorship as they clamp down on anything remotely controversial and unproven - possibly including some of the president’s own posts.Instead, lawmakers are investigating what changes, if any, could be made to Section 230 to offer clarity for both users and internet companies, as well as set boundaries for potential liability. 4178

ESTES PARK, Colo. — The family of 20-year-old Micah Tice, the United States Air Force Academy Preparatory School student missing on Longs Peak near Estes Park, Colorado, criticized the National Park Service during a Friday evening press conference.Benjamin Tice claims that officials with Rocky Mountain National Park, which has suspended the search for the 20-year-old man missing for two weeks in wintry weather, have not done enough to find his son. “Limited searches were conducted and directed by the National Park Service and their search and rescue from November 27 to December 3,” Benjamin Tice said. “A total of six days of boots on the ground.”Micah Tice has been missing for nearly two weeks. He was last seen hiking on Longs Peak in Rocky Mountain National Park on November 24. Rangers found Micah Tice's vehicle at the Longs Peak trailhead the afternoon of November 26.Watch the press conference in the video player below:Benjamin Tice believes his son could have sought shelter in an area the National Park Service has not searched.“Hikers who’ve gone to this non-National Park Service searched zone report that there are numerous shelters that a hiker could be protected from severe weather elements,” he said.Efforts to locate the missing hiker began on Tuesday, November 27, three days after Micah Tice was last seen. Search resources have included ground crews, trained dogs and helicopters. However, Benjamin Tice said his family has been denied access to additional resources in the search for their son.“Despite our family’s pleas with the National Park Service to request assistance from the military, and specifically Fort Carson’s Mountaineering Division, we were repeatedly denied and were told that the National Park Service had sufficient resources,“ he said.In a statement to KMGH, Kyle Patterson, the public affairs officer for Rocky Mountain National Park, detailed the park's efforts in locating the cadet."The search for Micah has continued in severe winter conditions. The number of rescuers in the field beginning the morning of November 27 through Monday, December 3, has been appropriate given the difficulty of the high alpine environment, and the safety of the rescuers," Patterson wrote.Patterson said the park used military assets during the days-long search for Micah, including the mountaineering club from United States Air Force Academy. Patterson said the park was not contacted by Fort Carson to provide assistance.During the Friday press conference, Benjamin Tice pleaded for help from state and federal officials, including President Donald Trump.“President Trump, we plead for your help," Benjamin Tice said. "Secretary Zinke has the ability to request military assistance, and we have thus far not received word that this was formally done, despite verbal understandings that this was done. Secretary Zinke, we plead for your help. Colorado Governor Hickenlooper has the ability to activate National Guard troops to assist with the Micah Tice rescue. Gov. Hickenlooper, we plead for your help. Colorado Governor-Elect Jared Polis has tremendous influence in this area as congressman. Governor-Elect Polis, we plead for your help."Friends of the family and other experienced hikers plan to search the area again this weekend. They say activity from Micah Tice’s cellphone was recorded November 25 around 10,000 feet, the elevation where the weekend search will focus on.The National Park Service suspended their search Tuesday. Officials say they could resume if conditions are favorable. 3620

ENCINITAS, Calif. (KGTV) -- The identity of the third victim in the Encinitas bluff collapse has been identified. According to the San Diego County Medical Examiner, 62-year-old Elizabeth Charles also died in the collapse. Her sister, Julie Davis and niece Anne Clave were also killed when the bluff gave way. A 30-foot by 25-foot slab of rock came crashing down onto Grandview Beach at about 3 p.m. Friday.Moments after the collapse, beachgoers and lifeguards began sifting through the rubble to save those caught in the rocks' path."The lifeguard was there, adjacent to the incident, felt it, heard it. It just happened to take place outside of his peripheral, as he was watching the water it happened behind him," Encinitas Lifeguard Captain Larry Giles said. "He immediately got out of the lifeguard tower, called it in, sized it up, started requesting resources and engaged in doing rescue work. Other lifeguards in the area filtered in quickly along with fire crews from around the area."INTERACTIVE MAP: Most recent San Diego County bluff collapsesLifeguards warn beachgoers about hazardous areas of the beach's bluffs, Giles added. Though, lifeguards can only warn visitors and not forcibly remove them from being too close.The city recommends beachgoers stay 25 to 40 feet away from bluffs and exercise caution due to the cliffs' natural instability."This is a naturally eroding coastline so it does happen from time to time. This is an isolated incident ... at this location," Giles said. "Our hearts go out to the families and friends that were involved."RELATED: Encinitas bluffs are a trouble spot known to geologists 1638

ENCINITAS, Calif. (KGTV) — One person is dead after being hit by a vehicle in Encinitas late Saturday.San Diego Sheriff's Department reported just after 8 p.m. the person was struck in the 2500 block of S. Coast Highway 101. The driver involved remained at the scene and deputies do not suspect alcohol or drugs to be a factor.A Sig Alert for S. Coast Highway 101 was issued as deputies investigated. All northbound lanes had been blocked.Anyone with information or who may have witnessed the collision is asked to call SDSO at 858-565-5200. 549

Every 40 seconds someone in the U.S. experiences a heart attack. According to the CDC, that's nearly 800,000 heart attacks per year.A woman’s viral tweet is pointing out the signs of a heart attack, which can be much different for women and men."I am alive because I called 911. I never had chest pain. It wasn't what you read in pamphlets. I had it off and on for weeks,” the woman posted on social media.Her symptoms were not what she expected. She reported having pain across her upper back, shoulders, and arms. Other symptoms included burning, aching, sweating, vomiting and feelings of what felt like a strained muscle.She later learned 95 percent of one of her main arteries was blocked.A survey by CVS Health shows 60 percent of women don't know critical components about their cardiac health.According to the American Heart Association, for both men and women, the most common signs that you’re having a heart attack are: 938