TL;DR: A lifetime license to the DALL-E AI Image Generator and WordPress Plugin is on

SEOUL, South Korea--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jul 17, 2023--

Anti-abortion activist Lauren Handy was convicted of illegally blocking a reproductive health clinic in Washington, DC after she kept five foetuses in her home. Handy and five other defendants were accused of violating the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE Act) — which prohibits intimidation or obstruction of someone seeking reproductive health services — when they blocked access to the Washington Surgi-Clinic in October 2020 using chains and ropes, according to a Justice Department release. A US District Court jury in DC found Handy and four co-defendants —John Hinshaw, Heather Idoni, William Goodman, Herb Geraghty — guilty on all counts. Each defendant was convicted of a felony conspiracy against rights and a FACE Act offence, the release stated, specifying that each face up to a maximum of 11 years in prison and a fine of up to $350,000. The Washington Post noted that a second group of defendants involved in the same blockade have a trial that is set to begin next week. The Justice Department wrote that Handy, Hinshaw, Idoni, Goodman, and Geraghty engaged in the conspiracy when they came from all over the country to Washington, DC “to meet with Handy and participate in a clinic blockade that was directed by Handy and was broadcast on Facebook.” Prosecutors said that Handy called the clinic while under the guise of a prospective patient to book an appointment to figure out when the clinic performed abortions — in order to plan when she and others could arrive to stop patients from getting inside. The Justice Department wrote that Handy, Hinshaw, Idoni, and Goodman “forcefully entered the clinic and set about blockading two clinic doors using their bodies, furniture, chains and ropes.” That’s when they began livestreaming their blockade. In terms of violating the FACE Act, the Justice Department wrote that the defendants used “physical obstruction to injure, intimidate and interfere” with the clinic’s employees as well as a patient who was seeking reproductive health services. “They planned their crime carefully, to take over that clinic, block access to reproductive services and interfere with others’ rights,” Assistant US Attorney John Crabb said last week. “The idea of deliberately breaking the law, to them, was sexy.” The group responsible for the blockade were reportedly members of Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising (PAAU); Handy is the director of activism. The group’s website says its mission is to “achieve socio-political justice for the preborn by mobilizing anti-abortion activists for direct action and opposing elective abortion through a progressive lens.” PAAU wrote on X in the wake of the verdict: “This is a gross miscarriage of justice, and while this is painful for all of those who understand that the unborn have a right to be Rescued, this is not the end!” The group added, “Rescue CANNOT and will not be stopped. This case was an effort by the US government to isolate and intimidate Rescuers and anti abortion people into believing they will face significant jail time for living in alignment with their pro-life values.” The case was brought against Handy and the other defendants in February 2022; one month later, police found five fetuses in a house in Southeast Washington where she was staying. Metropolitan Police Department spokesperson said at the time that officers were investigating a tip regarding “potential bio-hazard material” at a property in Capitol Hill, adding later that they located “five fetuses inside a residence at the location.” Shortly after that news broke, PAAU held a press conference announcing that Handy had 115 more foetuses that she helped baptise and bury in a private cemetery. Handy said at the press conference, “During the five days they were under my stewardship, the 115 victims of abortion violence were given funeral mass for unbaptised children and 110… were given a proper burial in a private cemetery.” Read More Everything we know about Lauren Handy, anti-abortion activist who says she ‘blessed and buried’ 110 foetuses Anti-abortion activists, including one who kept fetuses, convicted of illegally blocking DC clinic Abortion rights protests planned across Poland after death of pregnant woman

Homebuilder Toll Brothers Inc beat Wall Street estimates for third-quarter profit on Tuesday, as demand for luxury homes

Tributes are pouring in for Rosalynn Carter, who became a revered figure due to her active public service both during and after her time as First Lady

Inflation paused its decline in Europe in August

The Twitter account for the Netflix series "Peaky Blinders" posted a message on Wednesday strongly disapproving of the use of footage of star Cillian Murphy as lead character Thomas Shelby in a Ron DeSantis campaign video targeting the LGBTQ+ community, from the account @Proudelephantus. The video was retweeted by the account @DeSantisWarRoom.

SRP-9001, an experimental gene therapy that aims to slow or stop the progression of Duchenne muscular dystrophy, is being considered for accelerated approval by the FDA.

Twitter has been plunged into chaos in recent days, amid new “rate limits” and rules that actually stop people from using the site. The changes have been dramatic enough that they have led to speculation that they could be the thing to finally doom Elon Musk’s takeover of the social network. What are the ‘rate limits’? It is a somewhat technical term for a complex process that has a simple effect: users are rationed on how many tweets they can see. If people and the apps they use make too many requests too often – in this case for tweets – then the service will stop providing them. On Twitter, the new rate limits are different depending on what kind of user is on: someone who pays for the premium “Twitter Blue” service will get more than a normal user, for instance. They are also changing all the time, with the limit being increased recently. Twitter has long had rate limits, which ensure that malicious actors cannot send huge number of requests to the site and bring it down, for instance. But they would previously only have been hit by people using specific tools, since they were much higher. What happens when you hit the limit? Users will see a warning telling them they have received the rate limit. The site will then stop working properly, because it will refuse to load any more tweets. Why has it happened? The official explanation is that Elon Musk is concerned about how many artificial intelligence companies are scraping posts from Twitter in order to feed to their systems and teach them more about how to use language. In an attempt to stop that, Mr Musk placed the limits to make it harder for that scraping to happen. But there is no proof that is actually the case. The problems at Twitter may well be infrastructural issues caused by the site’s engineering, and its lack of staff, that have made it incapable of serving normal requests. Or it might be a mix of the two. There is no doubt that the site is being scraped, but rate limits of this kind are an unusual way of responding to it, and other sites that are being scraped have not needed to do the same thing. Are there other changes? The other major change instituted recently by Elon Musk is to ban people who are not signed into the site from seeing posts. This is ostensibly for the same reason, since it means that scrapers cannot just gather up posts from the site from the outside. It already means that some things about Twitter are not working as they used to. If someone sends a tweet within a messaging app, for instance, then the posts’ preview won’t show, since the app cannot access the tweet. Will this change how people use Twitter? Almost certainly. Much of Twitter’s value lies in its high-profile and high-commitment users: the celebrities, organisations and big brands who use it to post, and the engaged users who follow them. That is much of what sustains its place in culture, even as it gets fewer users than much bigger social networks such as Facebook. The recent changes have directly antagonised those users. Big organisations cannot rely on tweets as a way for anyone to see what they’re posting, since users have to be logged in; engaged users cannot rely on being able to use the platform, since they are set to be rate limited. What’s more, the recent changes could cause problems for advertisers, given how important it is for users to stay engaged and see their posts. Companies are already using Twitter less for advertising, as a result of other controversies, and that may just continue. Is this the end? Some people have been predicting an end to Twitter since long before Elon Musk took it over; when he did, those predictions got louder and more regular, but they have still been largely wrong. It appears that no matter what Mr Musk does, people keep logging on and using the site. That might well be largely due to network effects: the idea that the value really comes from the number of people using the platform, which also makes it very difficult to create a new one. People might be unhappy on Twitter, but the network effect means they might feel lonely or that they are missing out if they move elsewhere. But all of that doesn’t mean that this time around won’t be the end. Certainly the latest problems have the most obviously problematic effect, of forcing Twitter’s most engaged users to not use the app, which might finally encourage them to go elsewhere. In the end, the discussion is often based on the idea that there will be some big moment that causes everyone to leave Twitter, or for the app to die. In fact, social networks have tended to decline slowly before they are finally shut down; something that might already be happening on Twitter. What are the alternatives to Twitter? Again, people have been trying to replace Twitter for years, for reasons including everything from protests against its content management rules to opposition to its centralised nature. Attempts to create a new Twitter have only increased since Elon Musk took over the original one. But they have almost always failed to take off. Network effects and the relative maturity of Twitter as a platform mean that they have always faced a challenge, and never really met it. As such there are a number of alternatives to Twitter. Notable among them are Mastodon, which is decentralised and has become perhaps the most discussed new alternative, and Bluesky, an effort to build a new kind of Twitter that originally began with the company. But the most promising alternative might be about to launch. Meta is launching Threads this week, an app linked to Instagram that aims to allow people to post text updates that might have the might to actually take over from Twitter. What is happening to TweetDeck? TweetDeck also went down along with Twitter over the weekend. It’s unclear how the two are connected, though they happened at the same time. Now Twitter has announced that TweetDeck is coming back. But it comes with some changes, and the most notable of them is that people will have to pay for Twitter Blue to get access to it. Read More Twitter to stop TweetDeck access for unverified users Meta’s Twitter alternative Threads to be launched this week How Elon Musk finally broke Twitter – and why it might just be the start Twitter rival Bluesky halts sign-ups after huge surge in demand Twitter is breaking more and more Twitter rival sees huge increase in users as Elon Musk ‘destroys his site’

Major League Baseball suspended Chicago White Sox shortstop Tim Anderson and Cleveland Guardians third baseman José Ramírez Monday after the two were involved in a high-profile brawl at Progressive Field in Cleveland Saturday.

Amy Winehouse recorded just two albums during her lifetime, but her singular talent was enough to quickly earn her legendary status.

Learn more about the energetic breed and its history.