宜宾玻尿酸隆鼻整形医院宜宾芭比娃娃双眼皮,宜宾韩式双眼皮优惠价格,宜宾割双眼皮较便宜多少钱,宜宾综合鼻整形多少钱,宜宾自体隆胸一般多少钱,宜宾做双眼皮较好的医院,宜宾韩式微创双眼皮对比图

A former government contractor accused of leaking confidential information to the media has been sentenced to more than five years in prison.Reality Winner, 26, was accused of taking a report about a 2016 Russian military intelligence cyberattack from the NSA facility where she worked and sending it to an online news outlet.She initially faced 10 years in prison and a 0,000 fine, but accepted a plea deal. A federal judge sentenced her to 63 months in prison with three years of supervised release.The-CNN-Wire 524

A Black man who says he was unjustly arrested because facial recognition technology mistakenly identified him as a suspected shoplifter is calling for a public apology from Detroit police. And for the department to abandon its use of the controversial technology.The complaint by Robert Williams is a rare challenge from someone who not only experienced an erroneous face recognition hit, but was able to discover that it was responsible for his subsequent legal troubles.The Wednesday complaint filed on Williams' behalf alleges that his Michigan driver license photo — kept in a statewide image repository — was incorrectly flagged as a likely match to a shoplifting suspect. Investigators had scanned grainy surveillance camera footage of an alleged 2018 theft inside a Shinola watch store in midtown Detroit, police records show.That led to what Williams describes as a humiliating January arrest in front of his wife and young daughters on their front lawn in the Detroit suburb of Farmington Hills.Related: Detroit demonstrators calling for city to cease use of facial recognition technology“I can’t really even put it into words," Williams said in a video announcement describing the daytime arrest that left his daughters weeping. "It was one of the most shocking things that I ever had happen to me.”The 42-year-old automotive worker, backed by the American Civil Liberties Union, is demanding a public apology, final dismissal of his case and for Detroit police to scrap its use of facial recognition technology. Several studies have shown current face-recognition systems more likely to err when identifying people with darker skin.The ACLU complaint said Detroit police “unthinkingly relied on flawed and racist facial recognition technology without taking reasonable measures to verify the information being provided." It called the resulting investigation “shoddy and incomplete," the officers involved “rude and threatening,” and said the department has dragged its feet responding to public-information requests for relevant records.Detroit police and Wayne County prosecutors didn't immediately return emailed requests for comment Wednesday.Related: Detroit police board votes to approve DPD's use of facial recognition technologyDataWorks Plus, a South Carolina company that provides facial recognition technology to Detroit and the Michigan State Police, also couldn't immediately be reached for comment.Police records show the case began in October 2018 when five expensive watches went missing from the flagship store of Detroit-based luxury watchmaker Shinola. A loss-prevention worker later reviewed the video footage showing the suspect to be a Black man wearing a St. Louis Cardinals baseball cap.“Video and stills were sent to Crime Intel for facial recognition,” says a brief police report. “Facial Recognition came back with a hit" — for Williams.At the top of the facial recognition report, produced by Michigan State Police, was a warning in bold, capitalized letters that the computer's finding should be treated as an investigative lead, not as probable cause for arrest.But Detroit detectives then showed a 6-photo lineup that included Williams to the loss-prevention worker, who positively identified Williams, according to the report. It took months for police to issue an arrest warrant and several more before they called Williams at work and asked him to come to the police department. It's not clear why.Williams said he thought it was a prank call. But they showed up soon after at his house, took him away in handcuffs and detained him overnight. It was during his interrogation the next day that it became clear to him that he was improperly identified by facial recognition software.“The investigating officer looked confused, told Mr. Williams that the computer said it was him but then acknowledged that ‘the computer must have gotten it wrong,’” the ACLU complaint says.Prosecutors later dismissed the case, but without prejudice — meaning they could potentially pursue it again.The case is likely to fuel a movement in Detroit and around the U.S. protesting police brutality, racial injustice and the death of George Floyd at the hands of police in Minneapolis. Detroit activists have presented reforms to the city's mayor and police chief that include defunding the police department and ending its use of facial recognition.Providers of police facial recognition systems often point to research showing they can be accurate when used properly under ideal conditions. A review of the industry’s leading facial recognition algorithms by the National Institute of Standards and Technology found they were more than 99% accurate when matching high-quality head shots to a database of other frontal poses.But trying to identify a face from a video feed — especially using the ceiling-mounted cameras commonly found in stores — can cause accuracy rates to plunge. Studies have also shown that face recognition systems don't perform equally across race, gender and age — working best on white men and with potentially harmful consequences for others.Concerns about bias and growing scrutiny of policing practices following Floyd's death led tech giants IBM, Amazonand Microsoft to announce earlier this month they would stop selling face recognition software to police, at least until Congress can establish guidelines for its use. Several cities, led by San Francisco last year, have banned use of facial recognition by municipal agencies. 5490

A drug used to euthanize animals has been found in canned dog food, prompting a recall.Low levels of the drug pentobarbital were detected in cans of Gravy Train dog food produced by the J.M. Smucker Company, the FDA said in a statement Friday. Pentobarbital is most commonly used as a sedative, anesthetic or to euthanize animals, it said."Pets that eat pet food containing pentobarbital can experience drowsiness, dizziness, excitement, loss of balance, nausea, nystagmus (eyes moving back and forth in a jerky manner) and inability to stand. Consuming high levels of pentobarbital can cause coma and death," it said.The FDA said its preliminary evaluation of the testing results of Gravy Train samples indicated the low levels found were unlikely to pose a health risk to pets."However, any detection of pentobarbital in pet food is a violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act—simply put, pentobarbital should not be in pet food," it said. 'Single supplier' 984

A historic bill to legalize marijuana at the federal level is expected to come up for a vote in the House of Representatives in December.This would be the first time a chamber of Congress has ever voted on removing marijuana from the Controlled Substances Act.Cannabis was included as what is called a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act in 1970. Schedule I drugs are defined as having a high potential for abuse and no medical benefit. Other Schedule I drugs include heroin, LSD, ecstasy and peyote.“I write to share the busy Floor schedule we have for the remainder of the year,” starts a letter from Representative Steny Hoyer, House Majority Leader. “In December … the House will vote on the MORE Act to decriminalize cannabis and expunge convictions for non-violent cannabis offenses that have prevented many Americans from getting jobs, applying for credit and loans, and accessing opportunities that make it possible to get ahead in our economy.”The MORE Act - Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act - includes language that would expunge some cannabis records and create grant opportunities for people who have been negatively impacted by the criminalization of marijuana in addition to removing it from its Schedule I classification.The act is sponsored by now-Vice President-elect Kamala Harris, and co-sponsored by seven other representatives including New Jersey Congressman Cory Booker and Massachusetts Congresswoman Elizabeth Warren.Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is opposed to the act, and some say the odds of it passing the senate, even if it passes the House, are very slim.Marijuana is already legal in more than a dozen states, despite the federal designation as a Schedule I drug.Studies show more people support the legalization of marijuana. A 2019 Gallup poll showed majority-support across major political parties for legalizing marijuana. It showed 51% of Republicans, 68% of independents, and 76% of Democrats are in favor of it.During the November election, medical and recreational marijuana use was on the ballot in a handful of states. Four states, Arizona, Montana, New Jersey, and South Dakota, voted to make recreational marijuana use legal in their states. And Mississippi voters approved marijuana for medical use.Even if the MORE Act passes both chambers of Congress, it would not make sales of marijuana legal. Regulation of marijuana would be left to states to decide how to handle it. 2473

A CNN analysis has found that embattled Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt paid himself nearly ,000 in reimbursements from his two campaigns for Oklahoma attorney general, a move at least one election watchdog has sharply criticized as being recorded so vaguely that there was no way to tell if such payments were lawful.The reimbursement method, which Pruitt used in his 2010 and 2014 campaigns, effectively scuttled two key pillars of campaign finance: transparency about how campaign funds are spent and ensuring campaign funds are not used for personal purchases, according to a former top elections attorney and a CNN review of the documents.Some of the reporting may also violate Oklahoma campaign finance rules, according to research done by the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit and nonpartisan group.At EPA, Pruitt is under scrutiny for questionable spending and ethical decisions that have landed him in hot water with investigators and on Capitol Hill. Ethics watchdogs, federal auditors and congressional committees are conducting nearly a dozen inquiries into Pruitt's actions at the agency.During his attorney general bids, records show Pruitt made purchases and then received reimbursement from his campaign -- sometimes thousands of dollars apiece -- rather than having the campaign pay directly for expenses like renting a vehicle or purchasing a meal. When purchases are made directly, the campaign filings would show more details about who received the payments.Instead, dozens of entries on Pruitt's 2010 and 2014 campaign finance filings show payments to him but don't have the same level of detail, making it difficult to tell if the purchases were legitimate.The reimbursements are vaguely stated as being for meals, travel, office supplies, phone service, internet access and office decorations, and in some cases do not list the the vendors.A spokesman for Pruitt, Jahan Wilcox, described the payments to CNN as "standard reimbursements.""This is useless reporting," said Larry Noble, the former general counsel at the Federal Election Commission. He is now at the Campaign Legal Center and is a CNN contributor. "There's no way of telling if this is a personal expense. ... You couldn't do this on the federal (level) -- it's illegal."Noble said Oklahoma rules require campaigns to "show the ultimate vendor and an adequate description so you know what the item was for." Because some of the payments to Pruitt do not do that, "It was not at all clear that these were all lawful," Noble said.Noble noted that the campaigns, however, still made direct payments of more than .6 million."So he's not running the campaign through his credit card," Noble said.All of the payments were made when Pruitt was a candidate for attorney general or after he had been first elected to the office in 2010. The records do not show any payments since Pruitt became administrator of the EPA last year.As EPA chief, Pruitt has faced allegations he took advantage of increased security and made travel arrangements for his own benefit -- demanding to fly Delta in order to get frequent-flyer points and staying at posh hotels more expensive than government limits for reimbursement (which also placed an undue burden on his staff who have to pay out of pocket). He's also been accused of excessive spending on his office, like an ornate restored desk and a soundproof booth. In some cases, he blamed the expenditures on his staff.The reimbursements to Pruitt when he was AG totaled ,204.87 from the 2010 campaign account and ,665.73 from his 2014 re-election account, according to the filings.The filings show Pruitt was frequently reimbursed for dining expenses at The Beacon Club, which was described by a local newspaper as "Oklahoma City's oldest private downtown dining" establishment when it closed last year. "The Beacon Club was where deals got done," The Oklahoman newspaper reported.Some of Pruitt's reimbursements were for "officeholder expenses" -- meaning items needed for his role as attorney general -- after he was elected in 2010 and re-elected in 2014.More than ,000 is for items that appear to be office supplies and decorations. Around ,600 is described as "Artwork/Decorations" from retailers like Pier 1 Imports, an Oklahoma florist and a local picture framing shop. Records also show Pruitt purchased a ,400 Apple computer.Because of the limited information and lack of transparency, it's impossible to determine whether the purchases were appropriate and for official purposes, Noble said."Do we know how the campaign spent its money? No," Noble said. "How do you enforce a personal use prohibition unless you know how the money is being used? ... This is not any way you want to have a campaign finance log."The office purchases were made a mere 10 days after the Bank of America skyscraper in downtown Tulsa agreed to lease office space to the attorney general's office, headed by Pruitt. The move expanded the Tulsa AG's offices and placed them in the same building as Pruitt's campaign offices, raising the rent from about ,000 per month to ,000 per month.The office of current Attorney General Mike Hunter told CNN that around the same time, the AG's office was required to expand and hire more staff.One Republican source said Pruitt would sometimes leave the AG's office to work from the campaign office in the same building.His move to Tulsa was seen publicly as a convenience, since he lived in Tulsa and not Oklahoma City, where the AG is headquartered.Wilcox, the Pruitt spokesman, did not address detailed questions from CNN about the expenditures and decision to relocate his government offices to the same building as his campaign office.This week, Democratic lawmakers requested more information about a similar request Pruitt made of the EPA. A letter from three members of the House alleged that Pruitt, through his chief of staff, asked the agency to find a secure facility in Tulsa, where Pruitt lives when not in Washington, where he could work and make phone calls. The EPA says that didn't end up happening.  6121