济南痛风要多走吗(济南尿酸偏高怎么办) (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

Even the White House can't explain President Donald Trump's tweets suggesting California environmental laws have worsened wildfires raging in that state.On Tuesday, administration officials declined to offer any clarity on Trump's series of tweets claiming environmental laws and water regulations in California are hampering the state's ability to fight the wildfires. Wildfire experts and local officials say the President's claims simply don't hold up.Instead, some White House officials admitted to being slightly perplexed at where Trump may have gotten the notion that California's long-running water crisis and a debate over how to divide limited supplies are somehow related to the out of control fires.While Trump's tweets can sometimes be linked to segments on Fox News, there have been no correlating segments linking the two issues in recent days on the channel that frequently serves as presidential inspiration. White House officials also couldn't say whether Trump had discussed the issue with California lawmakers involved in the water debate.What Trump saidTrump launched his unfounded suggestions in a tweet on Sunday claiming: "California wildfires are being magnified & made so much worse by the bad environmental laws which aren't allowing massive amount of readily available water to be properly utilized."He then claimed that the water is "being diverted into the Pacific Ocean."He reiterated those claims on Monday, calling on Democratic California Gov. Jerry Brown to "allow the Free Flow of the vast amounts of water coming from the North and foolishly being diverted into the Pacific Ocean. Can be used for fires, farming and everything else."Trump's claims are false, according to California officials and wildfire experts.What officials and experts have saidLocal officials have made clear they have not had any difficulty accessing enough water to fight the fires. A FEMA official also told CNN there is no water shortage or problem with access to water hindering firefighting efforts in California.Interior Department spokeswoman Heather Swift declined to comment on Trump's tweets: "We don't weigh in on the President's tweets. We let those statements speak for themselves."As for water "being diverted into the Pacific Ocean," while there is a debate raging in California about how much water should be diverted to coastal communities versus farmers in the central part of the state, water is not being intentionally flushed into the ocean."I was stunned when I read this this morning," Henri Grissino-Mayer, a climatologist and biogeographer at the University of Tennessee, told CNN in an email. "California does NOT divert water to the ocean. Ridiculous."Grissino-Mayer noted that water "is diverted to the coastal cities for a constant water supply but all such water is used by the coastal communities."What's the context?Trump's tweet comes after California water officials ignited a debate this summer by proposing a plan to limit the amount of water that can be drawn from the San Joaquin River for use in cities and farmlands.The proposal has pitted farmers against fisheries and environmentalists, but Trump's attempt to connect the debate to wildfires doesn't pass muster.Instead of environmental laws and water regulations, local officials and experts have said scorching heat and dry conditions have led to several of the worst wildfires California has ever seen.Experts say those conditions are being driven by climate change, which Trump has previously dismissed as a hoax.The-CNN-Wire 3544

ENCINITAS, Calif. (KGTV) -- A young woman says she chased an intruder from her Encinitas home. When she began the chase, she had no idea he was armed with a knife. Just before midnight Tuesday, Maria Medvedev was reading a book in her home in the Village Park neighborhood. She was startled by the sound of the side gate opening. Then, she saw and heard a shadowy figure race out of her yard.Medvedev took off after him and found him hiding behind a truck in the street. She says he tried to convince her he was a neighbor, then took out of a knife and approached her."He flashed it and that's when I started screaming, 'Someone call the police. Someone call 9-1-1!'" she said.  706

Emma dedicated her life to school work, playing and enjoying life with her family. Quick to get a head start on school work. She was such a smart and silly girl. Loved to be outdoors and play with her cousins. A beautiful soul inside and out. 251

Experts say the United States is going through a maternity and child health crisis.“We know that every 12 hours, around the clock, a mother dies as a consequence of childbirth, and if you are a Black woman, those numbers are three-fold higher,” said Dr. Rahul Gupta, Chief Medical and Health Officer at the March of Dimes. “If you're an American Alaskan woman, its two and a half times higher.”The March of Dimes is highlighting the areas of the country that are considered maternity care deserts, meaning places where there are no hospitals providing obstetric care.They say a third of counties are affected and it’s not just a rural American problem. It’s urban counties too.Dr. Rahul Gupta touched on some of the consequences, such as mothers dying unnecessarily, 22,000 infants dying before their first birthday, and the pre-term birth rate rising for a fifth year in a row.The numbers and problems are amplified in maternity care deserts, which have a higher poverty rate and lower household income. That’s something that's escalated during the pandemic.“The COVID-19 pandemic has unveiled the underlying challenges as well as ugliness within our systems of care as well as communities in terms of institutional racism and bias as well as the socioeconomic conditions that lead to some of these outcomes,” said Gupta.A report touches on many different policy-based solutions that could improve access to maternity care, including expanding access to Medicaid for new moms from 60 days to 1 year after childbirth, allowing better access to midwives, reimbursement for doula care, and expansion of telehealth services. 1629

来源：资阳报