hacklink hack forum hacklink film izle hacklink marsbahisizmir escortsahabetpornJojobetcasibompadişahbetBakırköy Escortcasibom9018betgit casinojojobet

News

Tag: sites

  • California to consider requiring mental health warnings on social media sites

    California to consider requiring mental health warnings on social media sites

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California, home to some of the largest technology companies in the world, would be the first U.S. state to require mental health warning labels on social media sites if lawmakers pass a bill introduced Monday.

    The legislation sponsored by state Attorney General Rob Bonta is necessary to bolster safety for children online, supporters say, but industry officials vow to fight the measure and others like it under the First Amendment. Warning labels for social media gained swift bipartisan support from dozens of attorneys general, including Bonta, after U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy called on Congress to establish the requirements earlier this year, saying social media is a contributing factor in the mental health crisis among young people.

    “These companies know the harmful impact their products can have on our children, and they refuse to take meaningful steps to make them safer,” Bonta said at a news conference Monday. “Time is up. It’s time we stepped in and demanded change.”

    State officials haven’t provided details on the bill, but Bonta said the warning labels could pop up once weekly.

    Up to 95% of youth ages 13 to 17 say they use a social media platform, and more than a third say that they use social media “almost constantly,” according to 2022 data from the Pew Research Center. Parents’ concerns prompted Australia to pass the world’s first law banning social media for children under 16 in November.

    “The promise of social media, although real, has turned into a situation where they’re turning our children’s attention into a commodity,” Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, who authored the California bill, said Monday. “The attention economy is using our children and their well-being to make money for these California companies.”

    Lawmakers instead should focus on online safety education and mental health resources, not warning label bills that are “constitutionally unsound,” said Todd O’Boyle, a vice president of the tech industry policy group Chamber of Progress.

    “We strongly suspect that the courts will set them aside as compelled speech,” O’Boyle told The Associated Press.

    Victoria Hinks’ 16-year-old daughter, Alexandra, died by suicide four months ago after being “led down dark rabbit holes” on social media that glamorized eating disorders and self-harm. Hinks said the labels would help protect children from companies that turn a blind eye to the harm caused to children’s mental health when they become addicted to social media platforms.

    “There’s not a bone in my body that doubts social media played a role in leading her to that final, irreversible decision,” Hinks said. “This could be your story.”

    Common Sense Media, a sponsor of the bill, said it plans to lobby for similar proposals in other states.

    California in the past decade has positioned itself as a leader in regulating and fighting the tech industry to bolster online safety for children.

    The state was the first in 2022 to bar online platforms from using users’ personal information in ways that could harm children. It was one of the states that sued Meta in 2023 and TikTok in October for deliberately designing addictive features that keep kids hooked on their platforms.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, also signed several bills in September to help curb the effects of social media on children, including one to prohibit social media platforms from knowingly providing addictive feeds to children without parental consent and one to limit or ban students from using smartphones on school campus.

    Federal lawmakers have held hearings on child online safety and legislation is in the works to force companies to take reasonable steps to prevent harm. The legislation has the support of X owner Elon Musk and the President-elect’s son, Donald Trump Jr. Still, the last federal law aimed at protecting children online was enacted in 1998, six years before Facebook’s founding.

    Source link

  • Social media sites call for Australia to delay its ban on children younger than 16

    Social media sites call for Australia to delay its ban on children younger than 16

    MELBOURNE, Australia — An advocate for major social media platforms told an Australian Senate committee Monday that laws to ban children younger than 16 from the sites should be delayed until next year at least instead of being rushed through the Parliament this week.

    Sunita Bose, managing director of Digital Industry Group Inc., an advocate for the digital industry in Australia including X, Instagram, Facebook and TikTok, was answering questions at a single-day Senate committee hearing into world-first legislation that was introduced into the Parliament last week.

    Bose said the Parliament should wait until the government-commissioned evaluation of age assurance technologies is completed in June.

    “Parliament is asked to pass a bill this week without knowing how it will work,” Bose said.

    The legislation would impose fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) on platforms for systemic failures to prevent young children from holding accounts.

    It seems likely to be passed by Parliament by Thursday with the support of the major parties.

    It would take effect a year after the bill becomes law, allowing the platforms time to work out technological solutions that would also protect users’ privacy.

    Bose received heated questions from several senators and challenges to the accuracy of her answers.

    Opposition Sen. Ross Cadell asked how his 10-year-old stepson was able to hold Instagram, Snapchat and YouTube accounts from the age of 8, despite the platforms setting a nominal age limit of 13.

    Bose replied that “this is an area where the industry needs to improve.”

    She said the proposed social media ban risked isolating some children and driving children to “darker, less safe online spaces” than mainstream platforms.

    Bose said her concern with the proposed law was that “this could compromise the safety of young people,” prompting a hostile response from opposition Sen. Sarah Henderson.

    “That’s an outrageous statement. You’re trying to protect the big tech giants,” Henderson said.

    Unaligned Sen. Jacqui Lambie asked why the platforms didn’t use their algorithms to prevent harmful material being directed to children. The algorithms have been accused of keeping technology-addicted children connected to platforms and of flooding users with harmful material that promotes suicide and eating disorders.

    “Your platforms have the ability to do that. The only thing that’s stopping them is themselves and their greed,” Lambie said.

    Bose said algorithms were already in place to protect young people online through functions including filtering out nudity.

    “We need to see continued investment in algorithms and ensuring that they do a better job at addressing harmful content,” Bose said.

    Questioned by opposition Sen. Dave Sharma, Bose said she didn’t know how much advertising revenue the platforms she represented made from Australian children.

    She said she was not familiar with research by the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health that found X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube and Snapchat made $11 billion in advertising from U.S. users under 18 in 2022.

    Communications department official Sarah Vandenbroek told the committee said the evaluation of age assurance technologies that will report in June would assess not only their accuracy but also their security and privacy settings.

    Department Deputy Secretary James Chisholm said officials had consulted widely before proposing the age limit.

    “We think it’s a good idea and it can be done,” Chisholm told the committee.

    Source link

  • How Living Near Industrial Sites Can Impact Your Lifestyle – River Journal Online

    How Living Near Industrial Sites Can Impact Your Lifestyle – River Journal Online

    Photo Unsplash

    In the rapidly industrializing world, the pursuit of economic growth often comes at a cost. Industrial growth is widely viewed as a driver of economic prosperity, yet it can have serious, often unnoticed effects on nearby residents. Those living close to these sites may experience challenges to their health, well-being, and overall quality of life.

    In this article, we explore the multifaceted ways in which residing near industrial areas can affect individuals and communities. 

    Air Quality and Health Concerns

    One of the most pressing health concerns associated with living near industrial sites is the deterioration of air quality. Industrial emissions, including particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide, can significantly degrade the air we breathe. Long-term exposure to these pollutants may cause various respiratory and cardiovascular issues, including asthma, bronchitis, lung cancer, and heart disease.

    A recent feature of the World Health Organization (WHO) revealed that air pollution causes millions of premature deaths worldwide each year. In areas with intense industrial activity, this risk increases substantially. Residents in these regions are more likely to develop serious health problems related to pollution exposure. 

    What symptoms should I watch for if I suspect air pollution is affecting my health?

    If air pollution may be impacting your health, monitor for symptoms such as coughing, wheezing, eye irritation, shortness of breath, and fatigue. Persistent or worsening respiratory issues, chest tightness, and frequent asthma flare-ups are common signs. See a healthcare professional if your condition deteriorates.

    Noise Pollution and its Effects on Daily Life

    Constant noise from machinery, trucks, and factory operations creates a loud environment that can lead to serious long-term effects on residents. Prolonged exposure to high levels of noise can result in sleep disturbances, increased anxiety, and a higher risk of heart disease. 

    The American College of Cardiology states that individuals exposed to high noise face greater heart attack risks than those in quieter areas. A study found that elevated noise above 65 decibels accounted for 5% of heart attack hospitalizations. This data highlights the serious cardiovascular risks associated with prolonged noise exposure. 

    Water Quality Issues and Contamination Risks

    Industrial activities present serious risks to nearby water bodies, often resulting in pollution and contamination. Discharges of untreated wastewater, hazardous chemicals, and heavy metals compromise water quality. This degradation makes the water unsafe for drinking and recreational use and harms local ecosystems and biodiversity.

    Major polluters include oil refineries, chemical manufacturers, and fertilizer plants. Oil refineries alone discharge almost half a billion gallons of wastewater into waterways daily. Chemical and plastic plants emit millions of pounds of pollutants each year, including nitrogen, lead, and benzene, raising environmental health risks. 

    Industrial pollution is a silent killer, claiming millions of lives through waterborne diseases. A study published by Frontiers reported that over 50 diseases are linked to poor drinking water quality. Globally, 80% of diseases and 50% of child deaths are related to unsafe water. Water pollution contributes to conditions such as diarrhea, skin diseases, malnutrition, and even cancer, underscoring the severe health risks of contaminated water. 

    Should I consider a specific type of water filter if I live near an industrial area?

    If you live near an industrial area, consider a water filter designed to remove heavy metals, VOCs, and other contaminants. Filters certified for specific pollutants, like reverse osmosis or activated carbon models, would be ideal. These filters are effective in reducing harmful substances often present in industrial runoff.

    Soil Contamination and Risks to Home Gardens and Landscaping

    The toxic legacy of the industry can leave a lasting mark on the environment, leading to soil contamination and endangering overall environmental health. Industrial activities can release heavy metals, chemicals, and other pollutants into the soil, where they may persist for decades. These contaminants can be absorbed by plants, affecting both ornamental landscaping and edible gardens. 

    Eating vegetables grown in contaminated soil can expose you to lead, arsenic, or cadmium, potentially causing developmental and neurological issues over time.

    Chemical Exposure and Its Long-Term Health Implications

    Industrial activities can expose communities to a range of hazardous chemicals, some of which have been linked to serious health problems. These chemicals can contaminate the environment in multiple ways.

    Many industrial processes release harmful substances, including PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances). Dubbed “forever chemicals,” PFAS are persistent pollutants often found in firefighting foams like AFFF.

    Improper disposal of PFAS-containing products by industries can lead to the contamination of local water and soil. This contamination poses long-term health risks, including cancer, immune suppression, and liver damage.

    PFAS exposure, particularly through AFFF (aqueous film-forming foam), has been associated with serious health issues such as cancer, thyroid disorders, and reproductive problems. Developing fetuses and young children are especially vulnerable to PFAS’ harmful effects. 

    With mounting evidence of these risks, many communities are now pursuing legal action against AFFF manufacturers. Through the AFFF foam lawsuit, they seek compensation for health impacts caused by chemical exposure.

    Key claims in these lawsuits, as outlined by TruLaw, may include design defects, manufacturing defects, and failure to warn. 

    Design defects allege that AFFF’s chemical makeup is inherently toxic and harmful to human health. Some cases cite manufacturing defects, claiming production errors increased risks, while others argue AFFF products lacked proper warnings or instructions for safe use.

    How can I test my water and soil for PFAS?

    You can test for PFAS in water and soil through specialized laboratory services. Many labs offer PFAS testing kits for home use, which involve collecting samples and sending them for analysis. Results reveal PFAS levels, helping you understand contamination risks. Remember to contact certified environmental testing labs for accurate assessments.

    Property Value and Real Estate Considerations

    Proximity to industrial sites can decrease property values because of environmental and health-related issues. Properties near factories or plants typically see slower appreciation rates and may decrease in value over time. Potential buyers are often concerned about pollution, noise, and health risks. Also, living near industrial areas can make selling homes more challenging due to these concerns.

    When considering real estate investments or relocation, it’s important to assess both current and future industrial activities in the area. This helps evaluate how these activities influence property prices and future investment opportunities.

    Weighing the Impact of Industrial Proximity 

    Living near industrial sites presents both challenges and considerations, such as health risks from pollution and concerns about property values. While industrial zones may offer job opportunities, they can also affect your well-being and financial stability. Protect your future by understanding the risks associated with industrial areas.

    By staying proactive, you can balance the benefits and risks to ensure a healthy, safe environment and protect your lifestyle.

     

    Source link

  • Local news sources are still drying up, but there’s growth in digital sites in metro areas

    Local news sources are still drying up, but there’s growth in digital sites in metro areas

    Newspapers in the United States closed at the rate of more than two per week during 2023, but a burst of activity among digital entrepreneurs illustrated some tiny shoots of growth in what has become a desert-like climate for local news.

    A total of 127 newspapers closed last year, while the 81 digital sites gained was the most in any year since the Medill Local News Initiative at Northwestern University began measuring that activity in 2018, and possibly the most ever.

    “It shows that there are some entrepreneurs and innovators out there,” said Tim Franklin, director of the Medill Local News Initiative.

    One caution: digital news is still an area with a lot of churn. There were actually 212 new sites that started last year, including 30 that were former newspapers that converted to digital only, while 131 closed, making for the net gain of 81.

    The big picture also remains ominous, as few of the factors that have led to the decimation of the local news industry have really changed. Advertisers and readers are still slipping away. More than 3,200 newspapers have closed since 2005, leaving roughly 5,600 remaining, Medill said. Nearly 2,000 newsroom jobs were lost in the last year alone.

    “The local news crisis is snowballing,” Franklin said. “We see it in the expansion of news deserts, the unrelenting pace of closures and the loss of newspaper jobs.”

    The list includes the Hinton Times in northwest Iowa, which closed after 28 years when its owners retired; the Northland Press outside of Brainerd, Minnesota, which ended after the death of its publisher; and the Tioga Tribune in North Dakota, whose editor left town.

    Of the new digital sites, some 90 percent are located in metropolitan areas, servicing communities that had been seeing less coverage because of job losses at larger news outlets. In the Chicago area where Northwestern is located, Block Club Chicago offers hyper-local coverage to nearly two dozen neighborhoods, The TRiiBE is geared to young, professional Black residents and the Cicero Independiente reaches Latino consumers.

    While that’s good news for those communities, there’s still an urgent need for news in rural areas, the report said. Using a metric that takes into account poverty and areas with only one news outlet, Medill placed 279 counties on its “watch list” of those at risk of losing local news altogether. That’s up 22 percent from the previous year.

    Medill also noticed an increased pace in newspapers changing ownership — 258 in 2023 compared to 180 the year before. A number of smaller companies are more active in acquiring papers, as opposed to a large chain like Gannett, leading to growth in companies like the Carpenter Media Group in Farmville, Virginia.

    More of the digital start-ups that have opened in the past few years are nonprofit instead of profit businesses, said Zach Metzger, director of the Medill State of Local News Project. That eliminates the expense of printing and distributing newspapers, while offering greater flexibility in funding sources, he said.

    ___

    David Bauder writes about media for the AP. Follow him at http://x.com/dbauder.



    Source link

  • Big offshore wind project proposed for New York as other sites are evaluated in 3 states

    Big offshore wind project proposed for New York as other sites are evaluated in 3 states

    BRIGANTINE, N.J. — Offshore wind energy projects in New York, New Jersey and Maryland are moving forward, as federal regulators examine the proposals and opponents escalate their legal challenges to the work.

    A large offshore wind farm is being proposed in the waters off New York as federal agencies are pressing ahead with reviews of seven other ocean sites.

    Community Offshore Wind, a partnership between Essen, Germany-based RWE and New York-based National Grid, on Friday proposed a wind farm that would generate 2.8 gigawatts of electricity, or enough to power 1 million homes.

    The company also has an active proposal to build a separate project in New Jersey off the coast of Long Beach Island.

    It says its New York project is the largest offshore wind project ever proposed to New York regulators, although it did not say approximately how many wind turbines it might build there.

    “New York and New Jersey are both pursuing some of the most ambitious clean energy goals in the country, and offshore wind will be critical to each state’s success,” said Dan Sieger, the company’s head of development. He said the project would be built 64 miles (100 kilometers) off the New York coast and 37 miles (60 kilometers) from New Jersey.

    In July, Community Offshore Wind submitted plans to build an offshore wind facility in New Jersey that could power 500,000 homes.

    On Monday, the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management released an environmental review of six offshore wind sites covering nearly a half million acres (200,000 hectares) in New York and New Jersey, examining their possible impacts on marine life, shorebirds, air and water quality and other areas.

    It found that offshore wind projects could impact marine mammals and fish during construction, though they predicted such impacts would be temporary.

    But it also wrote that even with mitigation and monitoring procedures in place, “development would still result in unavoidable adverse impacts” including an increased risk of temporary or permanent hearing loss in whales and other marine mammals, higher risk of death for sea turtles struck by vessels and birds struck by turbine blades, and alteration of ocean views from shore.

    The American Clean Power Association called the environmental review “a vital step” toward getting new projects approved efficiently.

    On Tuesday, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration determined that construction of a 32-acre (13-hectare) facility in New York City where offshore wind towers will be assembled “is likely to adversely affect, but is not likely to jeopardize” the continued existence of sea turtles or Atlantic sturgeon in the area. The Arthur Kill Terminal Project is being planned for the Staten Island section of New York.

    That same day, in a review of a seventh proposed site, the agency also said a Maryland offshore wind project is not expected to kill or seriously injure any marine mammal species.

    The Maryland Offshore Wind Project could see 114 wind turbines, four offshore substation platforms and up to four offshore export cable corridors built about 11.5 miles (18.5 kilometers) off that state’s coast. Two phases, known as MarWin and Momentum Wind, already have preliminary state approval.

    And the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently granted New Jersey’s Atlantic Shores wind farm project a permit under the federal Clean Air Act. That led one of many vocal opposition groups to add to its legal challenges to the project.

    The grassroots nonprofit Save LBI is appealing the approval, and has filed notice of its intent to sue the EPA. Bob Stern, the group’s president, said the agency did not adequately consider potential air quality impacts on the Brigantine National Wilderness Area and the Edwin B. Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge in southern New Jersey.

    As of last month, there were 13 cases pending in federal courts targeting offshore wind projects, according to the American Clean Power Association. An undetermined number of additional lawsuits are active in state courts, they said.

    ___

    Follow Wayne Parry on X at www.twitter.com/WayneParryAC



    Source link