梅州处女膜修补术要花多少钱(梅州割双眼皮开刀) (今日更新中)

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

Fans of true crime will get more than they bargain for this weekend, as HBO releases a six-part documentary series based on the book of the same name, I’ll Be Gone In The Dark.The book written by Michelle McNamara follows the writer's own investigation into the suspected crimes and capture of Joseph DeAngelo, better known as the "Golden State Killer." DeAngelo was arrested on suspicion of at least 13 murders and more than 50 rapes across California in April 2018. This series, airing Sunday on HBO, comes as DeAngelo pleads guilty Monday to dozens of crimes in return for being spared the death penalty.But McNamara's writing doesn't just follow the facts and police reports that spanned over the 1970s and '80s as the Golden State Killer terrorized California. I'll Be Gone In The Dark outlines the true stories of victims as well as McNamara's own experience searching for answers.On Sunday, HBO's event will share the detective story told in McNamara’s own words, through exclusive original recordings and excerpts from her book read by actor Amy Ryan. 1067

Facebook users briefly reported widespread issues with the social media site Thursday afternoon, according to Down Detector, a website that crowdsources telecommunication and social media outages.Down Detector reported that it received more than 6,300 reports of problems on Facebook at about 2 p.m. Thursday. Half of those issues were reported as a "total blackout."After a short outage, it appears service was fully restored to the site.It's unclear what was causing the issues on the platform. 504

ESCONDIDO, Calif. (KGTV) - A brush fire broke out in Escondido’s Kit Carson Park Friday, sending a plume of smoke above the area. The flames started just before noon in a riverbed of the park at 3333 Bear Valley Parkway near Westfield North County mall, Escondido Fire reported. At least 10 engines and a firefighting helicopter responded to the scene to put out the fire in brush and trees. No structures were threatened because winds were blowing the flames away from nearby homes.By 2 p.m., the fire's forward rate of progress was stopped with two acres burned and 80 percent containment.San Pasqual High and LR Green elementary schools were briefly put on lockdown to safely keep students inside during the firefighting efforts.The North County Transit District rerouted its BREEZE route 350 to the mall because police and fire personnel blocked its route for firefighting efforts. A temporary bus stop was set up at Bear Valley and Beethoven just before 2 p.m., the NCTD tweeted. The route resumed normal operations about 5:30 p.m.RELATED: Check 10News Traffic 1073

Federal prosecutors announced Wednesday that they have struck a non-prosecution agreement with National Enquirer parent company American Media Inc., effectively ruling out charges for the tabloid publisher over its role in securing hush money from President Trump's longtime personal lawyer Michael Cohen.As part of the agreement, AMI admitted to making a payment of 0,000 in cooperation with members of Trump's presidential campaign in order to prevent former Playboy model Karen McDougal's claims of an affair with Trump from being made public during the 2016 race.AMI chairman David Pecker is a longtime friend of Trump's, and the Enquirer was one of Trump's most reliable and enthusiastic media boosters during the campaign.Pecker met with Cohen "and at least one other member of the campaign" in August of 2015, according to the non-prosecution agreement, which was struck with prosecutors from the office of the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York."At the meeting, Pecker offered to help deal with negative stories about that presidential candidate's relationships with women by, among other things, assisting the campaign in identifying such stories so they could be purchased and their publication avoided," the agreement read. "Pecker agreed to keep Cohen apprised of any such negative stories."Details of the payment to McDougal emerged in 2016, mere days before the election, when the Wall Street Journal reported about her agreement with the Enquirer. At the time, AMI insisted that it "has not paid people to kill damaging stories about Mr. Trump." The reported agreement drew wider attention earlier this year following a story published by The New Yorker, which shed light on the tabloid practice of "catch and kill," wherein a publication purchases a story purely so it won't run. McDougal signed a contract worth 0,000, granting AMI "exclusive ownership of her account of any romantic, personal, or physical relationship she has ever had with any 'then-married man,'" the New Yorker reported.The news of the non-prosecution agreement comes the same day that Cohen was sentenced to three years in prison for his role in the matter.In a statement, the SDNY said, "Assuming AMI's continued compliance with the agreement, the Office has agreed not to prosecute AMI for its role in that payment."A spokesperson for AMI declined to comment. 2421

来源：资阳报