India, Israel ink 7 pacts during Modi's historic visit

Jun 13: Requiring the wearing of masks to prevent the spread of the novel coronavirus in areas at the epicenter of the global pandemic may have prevented tens of thousands of infections, a new study suggests.

Mask-wearing is even more important for preventing the virus' spread and the sometimes deadly COVID-19 illness it causes than social distancing and stay-at-home orders, researchers said, in the study published in PNAS: The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA.

Infection trends shifted dramatically when mask-wearing rules were implemented on April 6 in northern Italy and April 17 in New York City - at the time among the hardest hit areas of the world by the health crisis - the study found.

"This protective measure alone significantly reduced the number of infections, that is, by over 78,000 in Italy from April 6 to May 9 and over 66,000 in New York City from April 17 to May 9," researchers calculated.

When mask-wearing went into effect in New York, the daily new infection rate fell by about 3% per day, researchers said. In the rest of the country, daily new infections continued to increase.

Direct contact precautions - social distancing, quarantine and isolation, and hand sanitizing - were all in place before mask-wearing rules went into effect in Italy and New York City. But they only help minimize virus transmission by direct contact, while face covering helps prevent airborne transmission, the researchers say.

"The unique function of face covering to block atomization and inhalation of virus-bearing aerosols accounts for the significantly reduced infections," they said. That would indicate "that airborne transmission of COVID-19 represents the dominant route for infection."

The U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention on Friday urged organizers of large gatherings that involve "shouting, chanting or singing to strongly encourage the use of cloth face coverings to lower the risk of spreading the coronavirus."

New Delhi, Jun 1: Actor Kendrick Sampson, who stars in HBO series Insecure, was struck by rubber bullets as Los Angeles police officers tried to disperse a crowd protesting George Floyd”s death in Minneapolis.

Floyd, a black man, died last Monday in Minneapolis, Minnesota after a white police officer pressed his knee on his neck for more than eight minutes. The officer was arrested on Friday and charged with third-degree murder.

The actor went live via Instagram on Saturday to show his view of events, but he could be also be seen on a CNN broadcast simultaneously, with viewers watching him get hit by a police baton on TV.

Sampson posted several videos on his page of a large demonstration at Pan Pacific Park near the city”s Fairfax District, where violent clashes took place throughout the day outside the Grove shopping center.

In one video, LAPD officers can be seen firing rubber bullets to try and regain control at the park.

“They shot me four times already. I already got hurt and I got hit with a baton,” Sampson said in the video on Instagram.

Another clip showed him moving away from the police, as he appeared to be hit by an officer”s baton.

“Y”all ain”t see no police f*****g up white folks when they took guns to the statehouse,” he said, referring to an incident in Michigan over coronavirus restrictions, not in California. “Y”all didn”t see police attacking white folks, beating em up with batons, shooting them with rubber bullets when they brought guns to f*****g state houses. We came up here with no weapons, with masks.… And we”re the ones who are not peaceful,” Sampson alleged.

Protests turned violent over Floyd”s death and other police killings of black people spread Saturday in dozens of US cities, with police cars set ablaze, reports of injuries mounting on all sides, shops and showrooms vandalised amid the lockdown.

Washington, Mar 1: The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has proposed a fine of over $200 million for all major US mobile carriers for selling the location data of customers to some agencies.

The Federal Communications Commission today proposed fines against the nation's four largest wireless carriers for apparently selling access to their customers' location information without taking reasonable measures to protect against unauthorised access to that information. As a result, T-Mobile faces a proposed fine of more than $91 million, AT&T faces a proposed fine of more than $57 million, Verizon faces a proposed fine of more than $48 million, and Sprint faces a proposed fine of more than $12 million, the FCC said in a statement on Friday.

The Enforcement Bureau of FCC opened this investigation after reports surfaced that a Missouri Sheriff, Cory Hutcheson, used a "location-finding service" operated by Securus, a provider of communications services to correctional facilities, to access the location information of the wireless carriers' customers without their consent between 2014 and 2017.

"American consumers take their wireless phones with them wherever they go. And information about a wireless customer's location is highly personal and sensitive. The FCC has long had clear rules on the books requiring all phone companies to protect their customers' personal information. And since 2007, these companies have been on notice that they must take reasonable precautions to safeguard this data and that the FCC will take strong enforcement action if they don't. Today, we do just that," said FCC Chairman Ajit Pai.

"This FCC will not tolerate phone companies putting Americans' privacy at risk."

The FCC also admonished these carriers for apparently disclosing their customers' location information, without their authorisation, to a third party

The four major US carriers mentioned sold access to their customers' location information to "aggregators," who then resold access to such information to third-party location-based service providers (like Securus).

Although their exact practices varied, each carrier relied heavily on contract-based assurances that the location-based services providers (acting on the carriers' behalf) would obtain consent from the wireless carrier's customer before accessing that customer's location information.