A federal appeals court panel on Friday unanimously upheld a law that could lead to a ban on TikTok in a few short months, handing a resounding defeat to the popular social media platform as it fights for its survival in the U.S. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied TikTok's petition to overturn the law — which requires TikTok to break ties with its China-based parent company ByteDance or be banned by mid-January — and rebuffed the company's challenge of the statute, which it argued had ran afoul of the First Amendment. “The First Amendment exists to protect free speech in the United States,” said the court's opinion, which was written by Judge Douglas Ginsburg. “Here the Government acted solely to protect that freedom from a foreign adversary nation and to limit that adversary’s ability to gather data on people in the United States.” TikTok and ByteDance — another plaintiff in the lawsuit — are expected to appeal to the Supreme Court, though its unclear whether the court will take up the case. “The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue," TikTok spokesperson Michael Hughes said in a statement. “Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people,” Hughes said. Unless stopped, he argued the statute “will silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world on January 19th, 2025.” Though the case is squarely in the court system, its also possible the two companies might be thrown some sort of a lifeline by President-elect Donald Trump, who tried to ban TikTok during his first term but said during the presidential campaign that he is now against such action . The law, signed by President Joe Biden in April, was the culmination of a years-long saga in Washington over the short-form video-sharing app, which the government sees as a national security threat due to its connections to China. The U.S. has said it’s concerned about TikTok collecting vast swaths of user data, including sensitive information on viewing habits , that could fall into the hands of the Chinese government through coercion. Officials have also warned the proprietary algorithm that fuels what users see on the app is vulnerable to manipulation by Chinese authorities, who can use it to shape content on the platform in a way that’s difficult to detect — a concern mirrored by the European Union on Friday as it scrutinizes the video-sharing app’s role in the Romanian elections. TikTok, which sued the government over the law in May, has long denied it could be used by Beijing to spy on or manipulate Americans. Its attorneys have accurately pointed out that the U.S. hasn’t provided evidence to show that the company handed over user data to the Chinese government, or manipulated content for Beijing’s benefit in the U.S. They have also argued the law is predicated on future risks, which the Department of Justice has emphasized pointing in part to unspecified action it claims the two companies have taken in the past due to demands from the Chinese government. Friday’s ruling came after the appeals court panel, composed of two Republican and one Democrat appointed judges, heard oral arguments in September. In the hearing, which lasted more than two hours, the panel appeared to grapple with how TikTok’s foreign ownership affects its rights under the Constitution and how far the government could go to curtail potential influence from abroad on a foreign-owned platform. On Friday, all three of them denied TikTok’s petition. In the court's ruling, Ginsburg, a Republican appointee, rejected TikTok's main legal arguments against the law, including that the statute was an unlawful bill of attainder or a taking of property in violation of the Fifth Amendment. He also said the law did not violate the First Amendment because the government is not looking to "suppress content or require a certain mix of content” on TikTok. “Content on the platform could in principle remain unchanged after divestiture, and people in the United States would remain free to read and share as much PRC propaganda (or any other content) as they desire on TikTok or any other platform of their choosing,” Ginsburg wrote, using the abbreviation for the People’s Republic of China. Judge Sri Srinivasan, the chief judge on the court, issued a concurring opinion. TikTok’s lawsuit was consolidated with a second legal challenge brought by several content creators - for which the company is covering legal costs - as well as a third one filed on behalf of conservative creators who work with a nonprofit called BASED Politics Inc. Other organizations, including the Knight First Amendment Institute, had also filed amicus briefs supporting TikTok. “This is a deeply misguided ruling that reads important First Amendment precedents too narrowly and gives the government sweeping power to restrict Americans’ access to information, ideas, and media from abroad,” said Jameel Jaffer, the executive director of the organization. “We hope that the appeals court’s ruling won’t be the last word.” Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, lawmakers who had pushed for the legislation celebrated the court's ruling. "I am optimistic that President Trump will facilitate an American takeover of TikTok to allow its continued use in the United States and I look forward to welcoming the app in America under new ownership,” said Republican Rep. John Moolenaar of Michigan, chairman of the House Select Committee on China. Democratic Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, who co-authored the law, said “it's time for ByteDance to accept” the law. To assuage concerns about the company’s owners, TikTok says it has invested more than $2 billion to bolster protections around U.S. user data. The company has also argued the government’s broader concerns could have been resolved in a draft agreement it provided the Biden administration more than two years ago during talks between the two sides. It has blamed the government for walking away from further negotiations on the agreement, which the Justice Department argues is insufficient. Attorneys for the two companies have claimed it’s impossible to divest the platform commercially and technologically. They also say any sale of TikTok without the coveted algorithm - the platform’s secret sauce that Chinese authorities would likely block under any divesture plan - would turn the U.S. version of TikTok into an island disconnected from other global content. Still, some investors, including Trump’s former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and billionaire Frank McCourt, have expressed interest in purchasing the platform. Both men said earlier this year that they were launching a consortium to purchase TikTok’s U.S. business. This week, a spokesperson for McCourt’s Project Liberty initiative, which aims to protect online privacy, said unnamed participants in their bid have made informal commitments of more than $20 billion in capital.Getting out for groceries: The new program helping seniors do their shoppingDaizen Maeda stunner continues Celtic Champions League charge as calamitous Carter Vickers bailed out - 5 talking pointsrich9.ph 。

Buffalo Bills quarterback Josh Allen is in the midst of an MVP caliber season, leading the Bills to a 9-2 record through 11 games. However, it is another award that Allen was nominated for that is somewhat ironic. Allen was the Bills' nomination for the Art Rooney Sportsmanship Award . The award was created in 2014 to honor Art Rooney, the late owner of the Pittsburgh Steelers. It is presented each year to the NFL player who demonstrates the qualities of on-field sportsmanship. The ironic part of this is that Allen was voted the biggest trash-talker in the NFL ahead of the 2024 season. Should Allen be the winner, he will receiver a $25,000 donation from the NFL Foundation to a charity of his choice. Until then, the Bills will continue their quest for a Super Bowl - the next step being a Week 13 game against the San Francisco 49ers.The third transformation is the integration of technology and artificial intelligence (AI) in investment decisions. With advancements in algorithms and data analytics, more investors are turning to AI-powered tools for decision-making and portfolio management. This trend has expedited the pace of trading, increased market efficiency, and introduced new investment opportunities. Nevertheless, it also raises concerns about algorithmic trading risks, data privacy, and market manipulation, necessitating regulatory oversight and investor vigilance.None

David Beckham's shirtless gym pic breaks the internetWitnesses Speak out on Cai Guo-Qiang's Drone Crash into the Sea during Fireworks Show, Express Regret for No Injuries

Report: Chargers expect WR Ladd McConkey, LB Khalil Mack to play vs. RavensA federal appeals court panel on Friday unanimously upheld a law that could lead to a ban on TikTok in a few short months, handing a resounding defeat to the popular social media platform as it fights for its survival in the U.S. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied TikTok's petition to overturn the law — which requires TikTok to break ties with its China-based parent company ByteDance or be banned by mid-January — and rebuffed the company's challenge of the statute, which it argued had ran afoul of the First Amendment. “The First Amendment exists to protect free speech in the United States,” said the court's opinion, which was written by Judge Douglas Ginsburg. “Here the Government acted solely to protect that freedom from a foreign adversary nation and to limit that adversary’s ability to gather data on people in the United States.” TikTok and ByteDance — another plaintiff in the lawsuit — are expected to appeal to the Supreme Court, though its unclear whether the court will take up the case. “The Supreme Court has an established historical record of protecting Americans’ right to free speech, and we expect they will do just that on this important constitutional issue," TikTok spokesperson Michael Hughes said in a statement. “Unfortunately, the TikTok ban was conceived and pushed through based upon inaccurate, flawed and hypothetical information, resulting in outright censorship of the American people,” Hughes said. Unless stopped, he argued the statute “will silence the voices of over 170 million Americans here in the US and around the world on January 19th, 2025.” Though the case is squarely in the court system, it's also possible the two companies might be thrown some sort of a lifeline by President-elect Donald Trump, who tried to ban TikTok during his first term but said during the presidential campaign that he is now against such action. The law, signed by President Joe Biden in April, was the culmination of a yearslong saga in Washington over the short-form video-sharing app, which the government sees as a national security threat due to its connections to China. The U.S. has said it’s concerned about TikTok collecting vast swaths of user data, including sensitive information on viewing habits, that could fall into the hands of the Chinese government through coercion. Officials have also warned the proprietary algorithm that fuels what users see on the app is vulnerable to manipulation by Chinese authorities, who can use it to shape content on the platform in a way that’s difficult to detect — a concern mirrored by the European Union on Friday as it scrutinizes the video-sharing app’s role in the Romanian elections. TikTok, which sued the government over the law in May, has long denied it could be used by Beijing to spy on or manipulate Americans. Its attorneys have accurately pointed out that the U.S. hasn’t provided evidence to show that the company handed over user data to the Chinese government, or manipulated content for Beijing’s benefit in the U.S. They have also argued the law is predicated on future risks, which the Department of Justice has emphasized pointing in part to unspecified action it claims the two companies have taken in the past due to demands from the Chinese government. Friday’s ruling came after the appeals court panel, composed of two Republicans and one Democrat appointed judges, heard oral arguments in September. In the hearing, which lasted more than two hours, the panel appeared to grapple with how TikTok’s foreign ownership affects its rights under the Constitution and how far the government could go to curtail potential influence from abroad on a foreign-owned platform. On Friday, all three denied TikTok’s petition. In the court's ruling, Ginsburg, a Republican appointee, rejected TikTok's main legal arguments against the law, including that the statute was an unlawful bill of attainder, or a taking of property in violation of the Fifth Amendment. He also said the law did not violate the First Amendment because the government is not looking to "suppress content or require a certain mix of content” on TikTok. “Content on the platform could in principle remain unchanged after divestiture, and people in the United States would remain free to read and share as much PRC propaganda (or any other content) as they desire on TikTok or any other platform of their choosing,” Ginsburg wrote, using the abbreviation for the People’s Republic of China.

LOS ANGELES — Jim Gaffigan is experiencing a major glow-up lately. He’s looking slim, trim and well-styled in a hip suit and glasses on a recent morning in a posh room at the Peninsula hotel. His vibe is a lot different from the hefty, pale, Midwestern everyman that a lot of people think of when they hear his name. But if you’ve tracked his recent trajectory, the recent evolution shouldn’t come as a surprise. From touring with comedy megastar Jerry Seinfeld to portraying Tim Walz for five weeks on “Saturday Night Live,” Gaffigan’s fit physique and wry, clean humor are meeting the moment by popping up in places that bring together the biggest crowds to laugh as a family about topics we can all relate to on some level at a time when we need it most. On Nov. 22, his 11th stand-up special, “The Skinny,” premiered on Hulu as part of the new brand rollout dubbed “Hulu Laughing Now,” featuring 12 new comedy specials per year on the streaming platform. We spoke to Gaffigan about the inspiration behind his new hourlong special, the pains of parenting teenagers and how growing his career while his body gets slimmer is only the beginning of his new chapter in comedy. This interview was edited for length and clarity. Question: In your new special “The Skinny,” obviously you talk about the fact that you’ve had a body transformation. What inspired you to make a change to become Slim Jim? A: I wish there was some romantic story surrounding it, but it really came down to my doctor who brought it up. [She said] “I’ve noticed you’ve gained a fair amount of weight.” In the ’90s I was working out twice a day to be thin. And then once I had kids, I was desperately trying to find time to work out. And then it just got to a point where my knees didn’t work. So [my doctor] said, “You can try these appetite suppressants.” And I’m like, “yeah, sure!” but I didn’t have an expectation it would work. Even when I was working out twice a day — I have a joke where I was like, “I need to work out a lot just to look like someone who doesn’t work out.” And so I was pleasantly surprised when it worked. Q: What are some vices, especially being on the road as a comic, that you’ve had to give up? A: I can’t tell you how much this drug curbs this insatiable eating I have, but it also curbs other things. So if I have one drink, then I’m like, I’m good, or if I have any kind of compulsive behavior, it kind of diminishes. I mean, I joke around in the special that I feel no joy, but it kind of makes you behave like an adult, which is weird. Q: Describe the process of whittling down the material for “The Skinny” and what do you hope that audiences will get to see from you in terms of what’s going on with your life and your comedy? A: Stand-up has changed so much. The notion that people are putting out multiple specials didn’t exist when I started with stand-up, but I think that people who consume a stand-up comedian’s material, there’s a familiarity, but it’s like a friendship. You can’t have the exact same conversation, even though we all have friends where it’s like we’re having the same conversation about high school, it has to be different. You both have to challenge each other. So there for me, working on the special or working on this new hour that I’m working on now, it’s self assignment. So some of it, as any creative person, it’s like, “what can I talk about that is embarrassing or is revealing?” I think that people that have tracked me along the way in my stand-up will be interested in my view on parenting. I’ve always had the view that I suck at it, but I have a greater empathy for what all parents are dealing with it. And I think also parents of this era, we’ve made mistakes. And it doesn’t help with social media and the apps and screens. And that’s something that’s revealed in doing my stand-up and in reading some of the parenting books. I don’t know if you have kids, do you have kids? Q: No, I’m still happy . A: (Laughs) There’s books that reveal the mistakes [we] have made. Parents of teenagers have this perspective. Adults have an impression of what their teenage years were like and I’m providing this point of view of what it’s like to live with these people. It’s kind of a cliché but raising teenagers is like raising a mentally ill person. It sounds harsh — we know there’s a natural separation process where teenagers challenge things but I love that I’ve gained this perspective of “was my dad a d— or maybe I was a d—?” Maybe it’s kind of basic but that’s something that’s universal. We all went through being teenagers and not necessarily the conflict but the misunderstanding between the teenager and the parent, which I find fascinating. Q: Do you think the stress of raising your own teenagers feels like payback for how you were as a teen? A: I would say I was a good teen. I was very hard working. I would say that my dad was unnecessarily annoyed by some of my behavior. And now I’m kind of like, “Oh, I get it. I totally get what his annoyance was.” And these are your children and you’d do anything for them. But there is a bafflement. I talk about it [in the special] where you have this sweet 12-year-old and then they change. And I’m obviously using hyperbole and exaggeration but there is a shift. And what’s so great about touring with the material is that it’s a conversation so the feedback from the audience can prove your premise or your theory. So even older parents, empty nesters can say, “oh yeah that’s true.” The hyperbolic, humorous statement you’re making is only funny because it’s grounded in a shared experience. Q: One of the things that is unique about your comedy is that it’s not about trying to say something necessarily outlandish. It’s about bringing people together in a way by poking fun at everyone at the same time. How did you hone your comedic voice and why do you think your brand of comedy is important these days, when so many comedians — or just comedy in general — is really dedicated to getting a reaction by saying something overtly controversial? A: A joke is a surprise and irreverence is kind of a shortcut to that surprise. And, by the way, we all love it, but I kind of nerd out [when talking about the idea that] there is an aftertaste to comedy. We all have that really kind of bitchy friend that makes us laugh, that is kind of a little mean, but then afterwards we feel a little guilty [because] I know they went too far, or, you know, I shouldn’t have laughed at what they said. I believe there is an aftertaste so you can take that short-term approach .... I think some comedians just do what they have to do. Irreverence is also something where it’s not in my wheelhouse, some comics are really good at it, and that is their thing .... I believe you can be respectful and highlight some important stories and also present the humor of it. Q: Considering how long it’s taken for you to build a career, it’s cool to see you popping up on “SNL” as Tim Walz, touring with Jerry Seinfeld, appearing in movies.... This is a pretty big comeback era for you — you are smaller but your career is getting bigger, does that feel weird? A: That’s funny — yeah, doing those shows with Jerry, I never had an expectation that that would happen. Jerry has a clear and concise view and philosophy on stand-up and comedy that when you talk to him, you feel like you’re talking to Aristotle. He’s kind of like a stoic [who reminds you to have] control of your material. You don’t get caught up in what the trend is of the moment. You work on evolving your act and your writing. The “SNL” experience was so surreal, because I never auditioned for “SNL.” I was presented an opportunity to audition to be a writer, but I was like, “I want to be an actor,” so I was resistant. But the opportunity to be in that orbit of this last vestige of American live television that still exists with its impracticalities ... there’s no replicating it. What “SNL” has done for 50 years is insane. So even when we were there [filming] and I’m sitting in a room with Dana Carvey, or you look out and you see John Lovitz or Chris Rock, it’s just bizarre. So gaining access to that is really an amazing thing.In the wake of this controversy, it is essential for influencers and public figures to reflect on their words and actions, ensuring that they promote positive and empowering messages that uplift and support others. Using one's platform to perpetuate harmful ideologies and attitudes is not only unethical but also damaging to one's reputation and influence.

Since its inauguration in 2006, the Emirates Stadium has stood as a beacon of football excellence, serving as the iconic home to Arsenal Football Club. The stadium, also known as the Emirates, has witnessed countless memorable moments, historic victories, and the relentless pursuit of glory by the Gunners. As we delve into the history and future of this grand arena, we are reminded of the rich legacy it holds and the exciting prospects that lie ahead.

The tactical battles between top managers, the individual brilliance of star players, and the unwavering support of loyal fans have all contributed to the enthralling drama that is unfolding in Serie A. The pressure is mounting with each passing round, as the top 5 teams jostle for supremacy and strive to assert their dominance in Italian football.Game-changing holiday gifts for building fires, printing photos, watching birds and more

While the retirement ticket controversy may cast a shadow of doubt over the upcoming Nanjing concert, fans are encouraged to focus on the music and the opportunity to witness a truly iconic performer in action. The legacy of 伍佰 (Wu Bai) and his impact on the music industry transcend any ticketing disputes, reminding us of the power of music to unite and inspire.Edifier Scoops 5 Honours At Prestigious Visual Grand Prix 2025