Allegations against rapid test providers Incorrect billing, high material costs

Status: 14.06.2021 6:12 p.m.

The rapid test chain MediCan is said to have, among other things, billed medical services and estimated excessive material costs for the tests. Learned that NDR , WDR and SZ from judicial circles. By M. Grill, A. Henze, J. Lange, G. Mascolo, C. Basl and P. Milling, NDR / WDR The two heads of the MediCan rapid test chain have been in custody for more than a week. The Bochum public prosecutor’s office had issued arrest warrants against the owner Oguzhan C. and his son and managing director Sertac C. because they are said to have accounted for as medical centers, although they lacked the prerequisites for how WDR , NDR and “Süddeutsche Zeitung” learned from judicial circles. In addition, they are said to have charged the federal government for antigen tests at higher prices than they actually cost in purchasing. The public prosecutor’s office is also investigating the suspicion that the company billed a significantly higher number of tests with the Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians than were actually carried out in the more than 50 centers. The suspected provisional damage amount is in the low double-digit million range, according to the assessment of the public prosecutor. One of the accused is represented by lawyer Reinhard Peters. As he announced on request, there was “an hour-long interrogation by the public prosecutor’s office” last Friday. Mr. C. Senior sticks: “All the tests that he billed have also been carried out.” Peters had no knowledge of the doctors previously mentioned in the MediCan’s legal notice – “as far as I know, according to the file, they have not yet been questioned”. Overall, Peters said of the allegations: “If there are reclaims here, then that will be reimbursed in full. That is no question at all.” His client did not try to disguise anything either, but made everything very open. “I just think that some things may have been misunderstood here. But I don’t see any intention of fraud behind this at all.”

Doctors who were almost never on site

Had only last week WDR , NDR and SZ reports how easy it makes the test regulation to charge excessive prices for rapid tests to the federal government .

06/04/2021

Until the MediCan case was uncovered, the imprint of the chain’s website also listed three medical professionals as “doctors responsible for carrying out the test and training staff”. Since then, the names of these doctors have disappeared. In principle, citizens’ tests that are carried out in rapid test centers under medical supervision can be charged three euros more per test than normal rapid test centers, whose remuneration is capped at 18 euros per test. All three MediCan doctors mentioned were employed full-time as plastic surgeons in a hospital in Lower Saxony, as the hospital confirmed on request, which did not know anything about the secondary activity of the employees. According to his own information, Dr. W. has been working for MediCan since December, Dr. P. and Dr. A. on the other hand only since April. Your task was to “answer telephone queries from the on-site staff,” as the clinic announced on behalf of the doctors. Dr. W. also carried out on-site staff training. He also checked on site every one to two weeks whether the hygiene regulations were being adhered to. “Messrs. Dr. P. and A. were never on site,” the clinic announced on request.

In future there will be no more differentiation in billing

It is not entirely clear whether and when test centers are allowed to charge the higher medical price for rapid tests. While the North Rhine Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians emphasizes that “a doctor must be physically on site” and the KV Berlin also states that a licensed physician “must be constantly present”, Roland Stahl, spokesman for the Federal Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians, announces that the doctor will Smear sampling could be delegated, but had to be “mostly on site”.

06/10/2021

The Ministry of Health, in turn, takes the position that a rapid test center can only bill as a medical service provider if “the medical management is closely involved in the care and organizational structures”. It is “not absolutely necessary that the doctor is permanently physically present”. “At the same time, however, it is not sufficient if a test site is formally under medical supervision, for example because it is run by a higher-level company under medical supervision,” writes the department. Before the case became known, 54 test centers nationwide were listed on MediCan’s website, Oguzhan C. himself said that the company had 102 locations. It is noticeable that not only MediCan, but also many test providers advertise the names of doctors on their websites. It is unclear who also bills the higher rate as a medical service provider, especially since the statutory health insurance associations do not answer any questions about individual providers. The sums they pay out are ultimately taxpayers’ money.

There is also a security gap in MediCan

The Federal Ministry of Health wants to end this confusion with the new test regulation. In the future there should no longer be a difference between “the remuneration of medical and non-medical service providers”. In the future, both should only get eight euros for the test and a flat rate for the test material. Some test site operators such as Hamburg’s top dog Moritz Fürste are already complaining that they will then no longer be able to work profitably and will have to close their centers. On the LinkedIn platform, Fürste writes: “If I were to reduce it to eight euros, I would have no choice but to close everything.”

Exclusive 05/27/2021

At Medican there is also the fact that the company apparently also had data security problems. The full names, date of birth, email address and registration date of the customers could therefore be viewed with little effort. This emerges from a report by the IT security collective “Zerforschung” to the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI), the WDR , NDR and SZ is available. Accordingly, booking codes from customers were only available with the seven-digit time stamp of the registration. This made it possible to see the personal data of customers from May: “In short samples, more than 15 percent of the attempts were successful,” the report says. It was no longer possible to determine whether test results could also be viewed. MediCan’s lawyer confirmed that there was a data gap in the booking confirmations. The server is now offline. MediCan’s test centers no longer exist.

INSM allegations against Greens Inaccurate to wrong

Status: 14.06.2021 10:22 a.m. INSM lobbyists want to brand the Greens as a supposed “prohibition party” – and list everything that could be prohibited under their government. But the allegations are only half done, as a dpa fact check shows. With advertisements in daily newspapers and on German media websites, the lobby organization Initiative Neue Soziale Marktwirtschaft (INSM) is targeting the election program of the Greens and their candidate for Chancellor Annalena Baerbock. The company, which is financed by the employers’ associations in the metal and electrical industry, lists several topics on which the Greens allegedly wanted to tame the Germans with bans. “All bans can be substantiated by the green draft program,” tweeted the INSM. But is that really true? The German Press Agency has examined four allegations more closely.

No new registrations from 2030

ALLEGED DEMAND: “You are not allowed to drive an internal combustion engine.” EVALUATION: Wrong. FACTS: The Greens election program for the federal election in 2021 stipulates that from 2030 there will no longer be any new registrations for cars with internal combustion engines. However, the party does not call for a ban on existing vehicles of this type of drive. Such vehicles are likely to exist for much longer, because according to a study from 2020, cars on German roads are on average 9.6 years old. On the way to climate neutrality, which the current federal government (without participation of the Greens) has decided for 2045, Baerbock’s party is betting on a quota for “emission-free cars”. In addition, the motor vehicle tax should make vehicles with internal combustion engines more expensive. In its more detailed explanations of the campaign, the INSM classifies this accordingly on its website, but massively shortens the topic in its striking thesis. The Greens also encourage “car-free city centers and districts”. Driving there would actually be prohibited – regardless of the drive.

06/13/2021

Ban on night flights

ALLEGED CLAIM: “You are not allowed to fly.” EVALUATION: Wrong. FACTS: The Greens aim to reduce air traffic. The party only becomes clear in the election manifesto with regard to short-haul and night flights. Short-haul flights should not be banned, but rather become “superfluous” by the expansion of rail traffic by 2030. In mid-May, Baerbock said: “There should be no more short-haul flights in perspective.” In fact, according to the election manifesto, the Greens want to ban night flights – for reasons of noise protection. The INSM shortens the statement here too. In the explanations on its website, the initiative only speaks of a “total moral ban”. By the way: CDU Chancellor candidate Armin Laschet has recently been open to renouncing domestic German flights – if there are appropriate alternatives.

Criticism of agreements

ALLEGED CLAIM: “You are not allowed to participate in free trade.” EVALUATION: Inaccurate. FACTS: An essential part of the idea of ​​free trade is the dismantling of trade barriers, which may well include social or environmental standards. The Greens really do not want open markets without any regulations. In the party’s election manifesto, however, it says: “We want (…) trade agreements that serve the prosperity of all people, demand environmental and climate protection and strengthen relationships with our partners in the fight for democracy and freedom.” For this reason, a planned free trade agreement between the EU and the Latin American trade association Mercosur is rejected, and the Ceta agreement between the EU and Canada is not supposed to be ratified “in its current form”. But even the INSM advocates restrictions, even though it obviously sets different priorities than the Greens: According to the lobby organization, “new legal standards, for example in the area of ​​investment protection”, should be developed for free trade agreements.

Top earners should pay more

ALLEGED CLAIM: “You are allowed to keep even less of your money, even though you are already paying high taxes.” EVALUATION: Partly wrong. FACTS: According to the Greens’ plans, there should actually be higher taxes for top earners, but in return the party wants to relieve those on low to middle incomes. Specifically: The election program provides for single persons with a taxable income of more than 100,000 euros per year to raise the tax rate to 45 (instead of the previous 42) percent. For incomes of more than 250,000 euros, it should increase to 48 percent. At the same time, the basic tax-free allowance – i.e. the tax-free part of income – is to be increased, which in turn is more likely to benefit people with lower wages. According to calculations by the employer-related Institute of the German Economy (IW) in Cologne, all singles with an income of up to 80,000 euros per year would pay less tax in the future if these plans were implemented. According to IW data, this means relief for the bottom 95 percent of incomes.

Sharp criticism of the campaign

The INSM campaign has been massively criticized for days. Chancellor candidate Baerbock is portrayed as Moses, above it is written “We do not need a state religion”. The Berlin anti-Semitism commissioner, Samuel Salzborn, said of the ad: “An election campaign is an election campaign, no question – but also and especially in times when there is heated political debate, chains of associations that accept anti-Semitic allusions are fatal.” The “Moses analogy, the reference to the strict religion of the law, the term ‘state religion’ – all of this arouses anti-Jewish stereotypes in the metaphor that are fatal in the political debate – regardless of any difference in content,” said Salzborn.

analysis 06/13/2021

Icon of Tik Tok video sharing app on smartphone screen in Paris, France. Photo: AFP/VNA According to the European Commission, consumer protection authorities in several EU member states have expressed concern about the way TikTok runs hidden ads aimed at children and the contractual provisions of its policy. of this entertainment application. The agency said TikTok has a one-month deadline to respond. The TikTok application, owned by the Chinese company ByteDance, is facing many similar complaints around the world. Last month, the UK accused the company of illegally collecting the data of millions of children in Europe. Earlier, in February, the European Union for the Protection of Consumers (BEUC) complained TikTok to authorities in 15 EU countries, accusing TikTok of failing to protect children against inappropriate advertisements. cases, thereby violating the rights of consumers in the EU. In the US, some lawmakers accused TikTok of sharing user data with the Chinese government, although the company that owns the app, Bytedance, still denies this. TikTok insists that users’ data in the US is stored in the country itself and that China has no authority over content not stored in the country. TikTok continuously faces many complaints in the context that this application is gradually becoming more popular among young people due to limited activities from living to studying of this group during the COVID epidemic. -19.

The lawsuit, filed by Attorney General Karl Racine’s office, accuses Amazon of controlling nearly 70% of e-commerce sales, leading to high consumer prices. Holding nearly 70% of commercial sales, Amazon is sued against antitrust in the US The complaint was received by the District of Columbia Attorney’s Office, which said: “This online retail platform benefits and is protected by Amazon’s anti-competitive business practices. That leaves consumers vulnerable. do not have access to the best products at the lowest cost”. In addition, Amazon also caused prices across the entire online retail market to increase virtual prices for products sold on Amazon.com as well as on competitors’ online retail sales platforms. Also in the lawsuit, the e-commerce group used methods to prevent third-party sellers on its platform from offering products at lower prices than competitors. Amazon also responded to AFP that sellers set their own prices for the products they offer in Amazon’s stores, and this response contradicts comments made by the Justice Department. This e-commerce group also prides itself on offering the lowest prices with the best selection unlike any other online platform, so Amazon reserves the right not to attach deals to products that don’t have it. competitive price for customers. This lawsuit has Amazon possibly forced to charge higher prices on its e-commerce platform. The lawsuit is intended to block Amazon from anticompetitive practices as well as claims for damages and other penalties. According to eMarketer, Amazon’s e-commerce market share in the US in 2020 is 39.8% and will increase in 2021 to 44.1%, equivalent to the amount of 367.19 billion USD. According to statistics, Amazon’s profit in the first 3 months of 2021 reached 8.1 billion USD, 3 times higher than the same period in 2020. In 2020, the US Federal and State Antitrust Enforcement Agency filed lawsuits against Facebook and Google for allegedly dominating illegal markets.

Tesla cars are restricted in China because of spying concerns Some Chinese government agencies restrict access to Tesla vehicles. They are concerned that car cameras affect security. According to the Reuters , many government buildings in China have just announced to restrict the entry of Tesla cars, citing the risk of spying. This move shows that the Chinese government is increasingly afraid of electric vehicle products from the US. In March, Chinese government and military employees were asked to stop using Tesla vehicles. The reason comes from the CCTV system on Tesla cars that can continuously record, track the location and travel time of the vehicle. The Chinese side is concerned that sensitive information and images may be collected and transmitted to the US. In addition, contacts or synchronized communication between the car and the phone are also said to be likely to leak. Before the newly announced restriction order for government buildings, Tesla vehicles were restricted from entering the premises of aerospace companies or the residences of high-ranking officials. In response to the move from China, in March, billionaire Elon Musk denied allegations about the ability of Tesla cars to spy. Speaking during an online meeting of the China Development Forum, the American CEO said that if Tesla used a car to spy on China or any other country, the company would shut down. China is Tesla’s most important market, contributing about 30% of sales to the US electric car company. However, from the beginning of 2021 until now, Tesla has continuously faced many difficulties and disadvantages in this billion-people market. In addition to the negative accusations about the risk of government spying, Tesla also faced a wave of criticism from users regarding its quality and unfriendly behavior with the public. These things forced Tesla to make concessions and defuse tensions by taking steps to comply with the regulations of the local government, while limiting the management’s dissenting statements in China.

Share with Business Insider , Saki (character name changed) accused Google of not resolving her complaint about being harassed by a male colleague from March to September 2020. This is the time when the Google office in Tokyo (Japan) switched to working from home due to the impact of the epidemic. In an email to Saki, a representative of Google’s human resources department said that the harassment took place outside of the workplace, not under the management of the company. However, Saki claimed to be harassed by colleagues while working remotely according to Google’s guidelines. “I’m completely disappointed… I don’t know what it would be like to work in an office,” admits Saki has difficulty reporting the inadequacies of working from home. Instigating texting when married Saki’s story was shared after 500 employees of Alphabet, Google’s parent company, simultaneously signed a request to stop covering up employees accused of harassing colleagues in April. Some documents shared by Saki for Business Insider including screenshots of messages between her and male co-workers, a copy of the complaint email sent to Google’s human resources department in Tokyo, and a statement from two friends of Saki. Saki joined Google in December 2019. Immediately after joining the job, she received a message from a colleague she had never met via LinkedIn. During the first week, the man offered Saki a drink. “I just want to talk about work,” he texted Saki. Google has faced many accusations of irresponsibility when it comes to dealing with employees who have been sexually harassed. Photo: The Guardian. A few weeks later, her colleague flirted with her by texting: “I find you very attractive… You are so beautiful in white. Come out for a drink with me.” Although Saki said that she was busy, this person still wanted to meet. By January 2020, Japan recorded the first case of infection. Both accepted to date in the context of the outbreak of the pandemic. However, only a month later, Saki discovered that the other colleague was married. Wanting to cut ties as soon as she knew the truth, Saki decided to video call Google’s human resources department to discuss. Through his lawyer, the male colleague confirmed that the “serious” relationship with Saki only started after he revealed he was married. However, records show that Saki called human resources on March 1, as soon as she learned that the man who flirted with her was married. Employees harassed for months, Google still “ignored” Recounting the meeting, Saki said the Google representative cited the policy of accepting relationships between two employees in the workplace, as long as one is not a senior of the other. According to Google, the incident described by Saki mainly took place at home, not the office, so it is not considered a workplace problem. “They said to me: ‘He’s not your boss. You also agreed to date so that’s your private matter'”, Saki said that Google considers this relationship a private matter, so it refuses to resolve it. . For the next several months, the male colleague continued to text Saki regularly even though she wanted to cut off the relationship. “I am very happy to meet you. I am always excited every time we meet. Hearing your voice makes me happy all day” is the content of the message he sent to Saki on April 4, 2020. Saki did not reply to the message. Google believes that employee harassment occurred at home, so it declined to investigate. Photo: Bloomberg. “I want to go for a walk with you,” a colleague texted Saki on May 8, 2020. 9 days later, another text message read: “You may be out of interest or not like me anymore, but I’ve been thinking about this relationship… I’d be happy if we could just go for a walk and talk about everything. “. For many months, the man repeatedly wanted to see Saki during working hours, although she repeatedly refused. “I don’t want to be the third person. I don’t want to see your face, we have nothing to say,” Saki replied to a colleague in June 2020. When Google announced that most of its employees would work from home through the end of 2020, the alleged harassing co-worker regularly visited Saki’s house without being invited. In the first time on July 10, 2020, Saki refused when he wanted to come to the house, but received the response “I’m in a taxi”. After being bothered many times, Saki decided to video call the HR department for the second time in September 2020. However, despite the “obsessive” harassment actions, the Google representative still insisted that it was a consensual relationship, a private matter, so he refused to investigate. “Neither of you have the right to impose others in the company. Therefore, we still maintain that this is a personal matter. I understand this is a difficult situation, but we ask for your understanding for the company. does not have the right to interfere in the personal affairs of employees”, the Google representative continued that it was an incident at Saki’s house, so there was no responsibility to solve it. Saki did not accept the above response because like millions of others, Saki’s home became a workplace for the whole of 2020. Not long after Saki’s second complaint, this man left Google to go to another technology company for unknown reasons. “I have to acknowledge his existence from time to time because our fields of work are similar… I still feel threatened on a regular basis,” Saki said, adding that she was still worried by the person continuing. continue to work in a technology company. Tired of the irresponsible handling of the human resources team at Google, Saki decided to leave the company in January 2021. According to research by Open Democracy, working from home has “provided an opportunity for bad guys to threaten, intimidate and abuse women”. Photo: AP. Does working from home facilitate harassment? Reply Business Insider A Google representative declined to comment on Saki’s allegations, but asserted that local policy “clearly prohibits harassment in the workplace”. “We investigate all allegations and will take decisive action if an employee is found to be in violation,” a Google spokesperson declined to answer a question when asked if the harassment policy was updated in the wake of the outbreak. not yet. The nature of sexual harassment in the workplace has changed after the epidemic. According to research by Open Democracy, working from home has “provided an opportunity for bad guys to threaten, intimidate and abuse women”. Although there is still very little research, experts around the world confirm that many companies have failed to adjust their policies. “In the world of remote work, harassment must be reconsidered. People can be harassed via text messages, comments and videos. That’s why it’s important to HR and public leaders. The company is about raising awareness, increasing training and opening up a safe psychological space for employees to speak up,” shared Josh Bersin, founder of HR consulting firm Bersin Academy. Inside Google’s $13 Billion Data Center In February 2019, Google announced that it would build more data centers in North America. This creates thousands of jobs and expands office space and data centers.

Americans call the unexplained neurological problems encountered by US diplomats in Cuba in 2016, including dizziness, tinnitus, headache and nausea – sometimes combined by a ” the mysterious but more serious noise …, is “Havana Syndrome”. Worth mentioning, in 2018, some American employees working in several countries other than Cuba such as China (in Guangzhou) also reported experiencing similar symptoms – dizziness, dizziness, fatigue, or headache and blurred vision, loss of memory and difficulty concentrating; some people also face severe visual and hearing impairment; Children in the house had nosebleeds – prompting the administration of Donald Trump to accuse the diplomats were attacked by a secret weapon. In the late 2010s, US and Canadian diplomats ran into health problems for unknown reasons; Source: stellariasacademy.online According to a study by the Canadian government, mosquito repellent could be the cause of the mysterious disease affecting about 40 US and Canadian diplomats in Cuba. Scientists from Dalhousie University and the Nova Scotia Health Service studied Canadian victims and the brains of a pet dog after death. The results showed that these people lacked cholinesterase – an enzyme necessary for the functioning of the nervous system. Some insecticides work by inhibiting this substance. In the period 2016-2018, Cuba stepped up the spraying of sterilizers to prevent the spread of Zika. That was also the time when the diplomats had unusual symptoms. It is not clear whether the Cuban people will be affected by the disinfectant, but the Canadian team of scientists is planning to work with Cuban scientists to further study this matter. Returning from Guangzhou, US diplomats were only given unpaid leave instead of receiving treatment and rehabilitation. The Trump administration has also not launched an independent investigation to find out the cause of the incident. American diplomats who had been evacuated from Guangzhou are still struggling for not getting the benefits they deserve compared to victims of “Havana Syndrome”; US diplomat Mark Lenzi filed a lawsuit against the State Department. Meanwhile, some medical experts and US officials believe that this is just a psychological disease formed in a stressful working environment abroad. According to the New York Times, the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Brain Injury Recovery has received 44 US diplomats returning from Cuba and 15 returning from China. Here, the treating doctors declined to comment in detail, but rejected the hypothesis of a psychological disease. According to them, these patients all have brain injury caused by external influences. Similar symptoms “Havana syndrome” The Pentagon and other agencies are investigating cases that have yet to discover or release details, but suspicion of an attack occurring too close to the White House is of interest, especially for reasons familiar – terror. In early April 2021, the Senate and House Military Affairs Committee was notified by Defense officials, possibly including an event that took place near the White House. The most recent reported symptoms of “Havana Syndrome” occurred next to the White House, for some people; Source: news.com.au The incident happened in Ellipse – the large oval lawn south of the White House – where the “energy attack” occurred that caused a National Security Council official to fall ill, according to some current officials. at and former US official with CNN. A female White House official reported the same incident in 2019, when she was walking her dog in suburbs of Virginia, according to a GQ report from 2020. All those who have experienced the million This testimony both reported their experiences to the CIA and the State Department’s overseas personnel department, to quickly open investigations of possible “Havana syndrome” attacks. A study by the National Academy of Sciences in late 2020 found that the disease that US officials acquired in Cuba still known as “Havana Syndrome” could be a result of microwave radiation. The document also said that the Soviet Union studied the effects of radio frequency energy 50 years ago – meaning any country, group or entity with similar technology could be behind the attack. energy efficiency near the White House and elsewhere. Microwaves are a type of electromagnetic radiation. The human eye can only see a fraction of the electromagnetic radiation – in the form of visual light. But today, microwaves are in common use every day – including telephone and television communication. Industrial applications include potato processing, plywood drying and curing, bread and donut making, etc. The Sonic weapon could have been the cause of the White House incident An energy-oriented weapon using microwaves can quickly heat up parts of the body – especially places with less blood flow, like the ears, testicles or brain. But more likely, the microwaves during the “Havana Syndrome” event – and possibly the one near the White House – were the use of acoustic weapons, or long-range audio equipment. Is “Havana Syndrome” caused by a mysterious weapon ?; Source: stellariasacademy.online Jai Galliott – director of defense and technology assessment and former Australian naval officer at the University of New South Wales – said in an ABC report, sound weapons can damage the lungs and liver. if the decibel level (sound measurement unit) is set appropriately. Galliott added, it has been shown that prolonged low frequency exposure can have other effects on the brain, and potentially affecting brain tissue. And these weapons are real. This technology has been around since the 1970s and was brought into public discussion in the 1980s. But because this technology is still in the near monopoly of high-ranking government officials – like the ministry. Defense (DoD) or Central Intelligence Service (CIA) – so it’s not easy to pinpoint exactly how the weapons and symptoms of the White House event are related to cause and effect. “It’s not particularly complicated technology, it’s in favor of how they use it [và] the effect they used [điều đó còn khó hiểu hơn]”; “Certainly Russia has that technology, America has that technology, and China too,” Galliott explained to ABC. While it is too early to say which device, if any, causes the debilitating symptoms that US officials near the White House and elsewhere experienced in previous months, we may be on the way. into a new era of discreet but effective attacks on high-ranking officials – leaving no trace of agents to be charged. It is possible that energy attacks are made from a low-flying drone, or an operator nearby, though this is only speculation. Canadian diplomats said their government has more detailed information on brain injuries caused by “Havana Syndrome”, but did not give further details.

However, the success of this person is not immune from scandals. MrBeast is accused of creating a hazardous work environment for employees. Photo: @mrbeast. In 2018, The Atlantic discovered that Jimmy’s old series of tweets contained obscene, mocking content aimed at homosexuals. In a video released in November 2019, the person was also accused of charity with counterfeit money, according to Dexerto . Jimmy then explained that he gave counterfeit money while filming to minimize the danger, avoid many people rushing to ask for free money. Last April, Jimmy faced a wave of outrage from fans – who lost significant amounts of money into a stream of cryptocurrency he promoted. A month later, 11 employees who used to work under Jimmy told New York Times that their former boss created a “hostile work environment”, based on bias and made “many unreasonable requests”. They affirmed this guy’s demeanor “immediately changed as soon as he left the camera”. Matt Turner (20 years old), the editor working for Jimmy from February 2018 to September 2019, said Jimmy cursed at him almost every day. He is also often referred to by Jimmy with phrases used to offend people with intellectual disabilities. Nate Anderson (22 years old), who only lasted a week working with Jimmy, admits his former boss is too perfectionist and “nobody can follow”. Jimmy vowed not to retire, pursuing this job for life. Photo: MrBeast / Twitter. After posting a video about his bad experiences while working with Jimmy, Nate quickly received a series of indignant comments, even death threats, from the fan community of the other net star. Many of them are just children. “Those kids don’t even know what they’re talking about. They just don’t want to see their idols fall, ”Matt, who is in the same situation as Nate, shared with New York Times . The Business Insider Jimmy is known for his mischiefs like reading every word in a dictionary, turning his backyard into a ball pool, buying everything in the store, even giving strangers $ 1 million but giving them only 1 minute to spend. use it. In January 2017, Jimmy became famous after posting a video counting from 1-100,000. After that breakthrough, this person produced a series of products with content similar to playing fidget spinner for 24 hours or watching MV. It’s Everyday Bro by Jake Paul for 10 hours straight. Due to regular vlogging to give random money to waitresses, taxi drivers and novice streamer, Jimmy is called a “generous philanthropist” by fans. In reality, however, much of this money is funded by brands, according to New York Times.

Google faces many legal challenges globally, especially in Europe. The European Commission (EC) fined this giant billions of dollars in three different lawsuits and were appealed by Google. In any case, the world’s largest search company denies misconduct and maintains a view that they make choices that benefit consumers. Since 2010, the EU has launched three different antitrust investigations against Google, involving Google Shopping, Google AdSense and Android, resulting in three fines of nearly tens of billions of dollars. At the same time, Google must adjust its behavior to comply with regulatory requirements. On October 10, 2010, the EC officially investigated Google’s behavior in accordance with Article 9 of Regulation 1/2003 after receiving complaints from ICOMP Organization and a number of other companies. They complain that Google changed its Universal Search algorithm to promote Google Shopping products on the search results page, lowering the ranking of competitors. Therefore, they believe that Google discriminates against, anticompetitive through presentation of search results, depriving users of the ability to choose products and services. On June 27, 2017, Google was found guilty and convicted a fine of EUR 2.4 billion (2.7 billion USD), is the largest penalty for an abuse of monopoly at that time. Google denies the accusations and claims their services have helped the region’s digital economy grow. The penalty is equivalent to 2.5% of Google’s 2016 revenue. Currently, the company in the appeals process wants to mitigate or overturn the penalty. In addition, the EU Competition Commission (EUCC) decided to oversee Google’s PageRank algorithm. Google is responsible for reporting to the EUCC every 4 months. After being penalized, Google split the Google Shopping shopping service into its own company, operating independently. A year later, the EC fined Google again for forcing Android device manufacturers (OEMs) to install Google Search and Android suite of apps. The EC investigates Google based on two lawsuits, one from FairSearch, and one from Aptoide. FairSearch is a consortium founded in 2010, initially consisting of travel-related websites such as Expedia, TripAdvisor, and then a number of big names such as Microsoft, Nokia, Oracle. In April 2013, they filed a lawsuit against the EU, denouncing Google’s behavior with its Android operating system in violation of the EU’s anti-competition law. Meanwhile, Aptoide was filed in June 2014. Aptoide is an Android app market, competing with Google’s Play Store. Aptoide emphasizes Google’s approach making it very difficult for services like them to be installed on users’ devices. In addition, some components that used to belong to the Android Open Source Project have been migrated to the Google service suite, including Gmail, Google Maps and Play Store. So, on April 15, 2015, the EC started an investigation into Google based on the above two lawsuits. Google argues that what it does with Android is no different from what Apple, Microsoft do with iOS and Windows Phone. Device manufacturers can still release an Android phone without the Google suite of apps. On July 19, 2018, the EU declared penalty Google 4.3 billion EUR (5 billion USD). Google appealed in October 2018. According to a company spokesperson, Android makes more options available to users. This is by far the largest penalty imposed by the EU for a company for its anti-competitive behavior. Google has changed the way apps are distributed in the EU, charging OEMs for Play Store access, and in return OEMs no longer have to install Google Search and Google Chrome. In March 2019, Google said European Android users can choose which browser and search engine they want to use on the device. Most recently, March 2019, EU Google penalty 1.49 billion EUR (1.7 billion USD) for preventing competition in the online advertising market. The commission said Google had an exclusive contract with website owners, preventing them from cooperating with Google’s competitors. The investigation involved Google search-mediated search boxes and display ads. These ads are provided by Google AdSense for Search. This is a division of Google that allows websites and apps to monetize search ads. Google’s terms for website owners change over time, from a 2006 monopoly to a “flexible monopoly” a few years later. But EU authorities still believe it hurts competition and allows Google to control how competitors display their search ads, including the size, colors and fonts they use. According to Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, this is a legal offense under EU law. That behavior lasted more than 10 years and deprived other brands of competitiveness, innovation as well as the interests of users. Google stopped using exclusive contract terms in 2016 only after the EC made a formal objection. In June 2019, the company announced an appeal. However, the three above-mentioned penalties do not seem to “disgrace” anything to Google. Shares of Alphabet, the parent company Google, are still growing close to 30% in 2020. Investors seem accustomed to the oversight of countries with Google. Not to mention, the prolonged legal process also makes the authorities tired. The effect that the punishment brings is not clear. For example, despite the change in Google Shopping, less than 1% of service traffic is diverted to other shopping websites. Therefore, the EC is about to overhaul digital regulations, related to the business models of companies like Google. They want Big Tech to be more accountable for content across platforms and ensure that competitors have a chance to compete with the big boys. It is expected to make a big change in business practices, even Big Tech’s business model. Law professor Ioannis Kokkoris from Queen Mary University said this is a move that shows the EU wants to strengthen its leadership position in the enforcement of the technology market. Many other national competition authorities will follow. Meanwhile, Alec Burnside – partner of the law firm Dechert – said that the new EU proposal reflects the increasingly recognized government must have new power to deal with technology giants. For its part, Google or another company may use legal process to highlight the negative impact of regulation on innovation and the overall economy, making the final regulation less stricter than the proposed ban. head. Other than lobbying, however, there is nothing they can do about it to discourage new regulation in the short term. Du Lam (Synthetic)

According to this brand, Signal Brands – which is licensed to manufacture Guess handbags – has voluntarily stopped selling G-Logo bags. “Some feedback on social media compared this product to Telfar’s handbag design. Signal Brands didn’t want to have any obstacles to Telfar’s success and decided to stop selling bags with the logo. G “, representative Guess said. Guess decided to stop selling plagiarized Telfar tote bags. Photo: @dietprada. Previously, Guess was controversial when he produced a new line of bags called G-Logo in the Spring-Summer season 2021. Specifically, the company launched a tote bag design with white tones covered with G logo printed. float on a synthetic leather background. Graves found a 90% similarity to Telfar handbags with a distinctive circle surrounding the brand’s logo, and in monochrome. Designer Telfar Clemens launched this product in 2014 with vegan leather stamped with a T on the body. “Why can the big brand steal the blatant idea of ​​a black designer. This brand is also copyrighted for the product, I am ashamed of what Guess does,” said the account. @danasia_sutton Leave a comment. As for Telfar, the brand acquired this plagiarism information in February, but decided to remain silent and have no intention of filing a lawsuit against the US brand because of the financial story. Designer Telfar Clemens thanked netizens for pressure Guess to stop selling plagiarized tote bags. Telfar tote bag launched in 2014. Photo: Independent.

Icon of Tik Tok video-sharing application on smartphone screen in Paris, France. Photo: AFP / VNA Former UK children’s commissioner Anne Longfield, and the law firm Scott + Scott, on behalf of children under the age of 13 in the UK and 16 years old in the European Economic Area (EEA) filed a lawsuit against TikTok and the public. parent company ByteDance. The lawsuit alleges TikTok and ByteDance violate the data protection laws of children (GDPR) of the UK and the European Union (EU) and deceive parents about the extent of personal information leakage of the children. kids when they use this app. TikTok’s behavior is believed to affect more than 3.5 million children in the UK. In a statement dated April 21, Ms. Longfield emphasized “TikTok is an extremely popular social media platform that helps children keep in touch with their friends during the past extremely difficult year. Behind the hilarious songs, choreography challenges and the lip-sync movement is something much more damaging. According to her, parents as well as children have the right to personal information, including phone number, physical location and illegally collected videos. The former UK children’s commissioner stated that the lawsuit is intended to force TikTok to “terminate data collection”, and to ask the platform to remove any personal information that has been “illegally processed”. when kids use this app. The lawsuit states that since May 2018, every child using TikTok, regardless of having an account or possible privacy settings, has been illegally collected by ByteDance through TikTok for the benefit of Unidentified third parties. The lawsuit also mentioned recent hefty fines for TikTok in the US and South Korea following cases of child data leaks. In response, TikTok insists the app has “robust policies, procedures and technologies to help protect all users, especially teen users”. TikTok will strongly protect itself, while asserting that privacy and safety are always the “top priority” of this platform.

The former US president has criticized the South Korean president as “weak” as a leader and negotiator. “We have been treated like idiots for decades. However, I have made them pay billions of dollars more for the cost of the defense the US provides,” he stressed. “The Biden administration has not asked for the additional billions of dollars that Korea has agreed to pay us,” Mr. Trump added, referring to incumbent President Joe Biden. During his presidency, former President Trump has identified himself as the leading negotiator in peace talks on the Korean peninsula. He first met Mr. Kim during the first summit between the two countries in June 2018 in Singapore. The two later expressed good sympathy for each other. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un and former US President Donald Trump. Photo: AFP. The two leaders have met twice again during Trump’s time in office, and North Korea has suspended nuclear and missile tests. However, analysts say Pyongyang will continue to push ahead with its weapons programs. In March, South Korea agreed to pay an additional 13.9% for the cost of maintaining US forces stationed in the country. Thus, the six-year “special measures agreement” will replace the previous US-Korean agreement that expired at the end of 2019. Under the new agreement, Seoul will agree to pay 1,180 billion won ($ 1.03 billion) for 2021. This is lower than the $ 5 billion required by Trump, but this is the largest annual increase in the near future. 2 decades. The financial dispute has rippled the two countries’ security alliances since Trump has repeatedly accused South Korea of ​​being a “stalker”. Washington currently has about 28,500 troops in South Korea to protect the country from its nuclear-armed neighbor North Korea, while also protecting US interests in Northeast Asia.

Artwork: Getty In an explanatory statement released later, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio emphasized: “We need to attack the biggest polluting corporations, with false advertising about fighting climate change.” According to the head of the New York City Consumer and Workers Protection Agency Lorelei Salas, energy corporations have committed acts of harming consumers’ interests by always advertising only products. “Clean and environmentally friendly” without mentioning, even “hiding” negative impacts on the climate. And this has influenced consumers’ decisions and protecting benefits. profits for oil and gas corporations. This is not the first time New York City has “declared war” on the giants of the oil industry. In early 2018, New York Mayor De Blasio announced the city was suing five fossil fuel companies – BP, Exxon Mobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and Shell – to federal court for their roles in Climate Change. At the end of 2019, New York City continued to sue ExxonMobil Group in a climate change issue. Lawsuits are filed with the aim of forcing energy corporations to tell the truth about commercial behavior and the products they sell, according to New York City Law Officer James Johnson. “Consumers have the right to choose different products and many consumers are very concerned about climate change”, added Mr. James Jhonson.

The above report was made by Capgemini for KPN, one of the largest telecommunications networks in the Netherlands, in 2010. This report was later published by De Volkskrant . Although KPN acknowledged the existence of the report, the company stated on April 19 that it “had never seen Huawei steal customer information”. This telecommunication network also affirmed that none of their partners “have the ability to access illegally or have unlimited control over the system of KPN”. Huawei also denied that: “We have never been accused of illegal acts by the government”. Huawei is one of the telecommunications equipment suppliers that have suffered the most information theft charges in Europe. Photo: Shutterstock. KPN started using Huawei’s technology in 2009. After AIVD, the Dutch domestic intelligence agency, warned of the possibility of being eavesdropped, the KPN commissioned the report. The report concludes that users of KPN “can lose confidence” in this telecommunications network “if they know that the Chinese government can monitor calls of KPN mobile numbers”. Even after receiving reports from Capgemini, KPN continued to buy technical equipment to establish Huawei’s 3G and 4G networks, according to Guardian . However, by 2020, KPN becomes one of the first telecommunications companies in Europe to exclude Huawei from its 5G network development program. Instead, KPN chose Ericsson from Sweden to coordinate the construction of its 5G network. Meanwhile, the Dutch government is also tightening regulations on telecommunications equipment suppliers, including background checks on employees with access to the network.

Russian President Putin and US President Biden. Photo: BBC

“When I spoke to President Putin, I expressed confidence that direct and personal communication between the two of us is essential to a more effective relationship. He agrees on that point.” – he said.

He added: “So I proposed that we meet face to face this summer in Europe for a summit to address a wide range of issues that both our countries are facing. face.”

According to him, “our teams are discussing this possibility right now.”

“And if that summit takes place and I believe it will happen, the US and Russia can launch a dialogue of strategic stability to pursue cooperation in arms control,” Biden stressed. and security ”.

“We can tackle important global challenges that require Russia and the US to work together, including curbing nuclear threats from Iran and North Korea, ending the global pandemic. and deal with the existing climate change crisis “- declared by US President.

In the same speech, Mr. Biden said he warned Russian President Vladimir Putin of the sanctions in a phone call he called a “straightforward, respectful conversation” on April 13.

“I have made it clear to President Putin that we can take more action, but I choose not to. I chose to respond accordingly. The US does not want to start a cycle of escalation and conflict with Russia. We want a stable, predictable relationship, ”Mr. Biden said at the White House on April 15.

The sanctions “send a signal that the United States will impose measures strategically and have an economic impact on Russia if it continues or escalates destabilizing international actions,” the White House said. know in a statement. “Our goal is not to escalate, to impose sanctions on what we feel is an unacceptable action by the Russian government,” White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said. before the press on April 15.

The White House said on April 15 that recent sanctions actions were also prompted by Moscow “targeting dissidents or journalists” and undermining “security in countries and regions.” important to US national security ”, referring to the recent Russian alleged poisoning of opposition leader Alexey Navalny and military consolidation along the Ukrainian border.

Mr. Biden has strained his relationship with Putin personally by agreeing with the view that Putin is a “killer”. The US President did not apologize and also refused to hold talks with the Russian President when Putin proposed a dialogue.

For a while, Mr. Biden continued to send signals that the US would punish Russia for its interference in the US’s internal affairs, including cyber attacks and election interference. At the same time, the US leader suggests direct dialogue with the Russian President.

For the past two days, Mr. Biden has repeatedly heated up American media about what he sees as a measure of pressure on Moscow, forcing it to pay the price for what it has done with America, while leaving the door open. the door to directly negotiate with Mr. Putin.

Analysts said that Mr. Biden’s actions in imposing new sanctions against the possibility of a live conference with Putin, will give Mr. Biden’s negotiating advantage.

Expert Lev Sokolschik, scientist of the Center for Integrated Research on European and International Affairs at Russia’s HSE State Research University, said that the US is continuing its policy of restraining Russia on all fronts. Important aspects include economic, military, political and using pressure in areas of interest to win the US over Russia.

The US has followed the roadmap: Announcing the summit proposal, negotiating and then imposing sanctions on dialogue with Russia with its strengths, the Russian expert said.

However, given the ever-confrontational nature of the Russia-US relationship, the actions of the US would immediately receive a response from Russia. The Russian side is also considering a number of retaliation sanctions and could be announced in the near future.

US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan previously called the sanctions “adequate measures to protect US interests from harmful Russian actions including cyber intrusion and election interference”.

The recently announced measures include sanctions on six Russian companies that support domestic cyber operations, along with sanctions on 32 individuals and organizations allegedly trying. to interfere in last year’s presidential election.

The White House said 10 Russian diplomats were deported, including representatives of Russian intelligence agencies.

“What is currently being considered – possibly sanctions – will not help the meeting,” said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.

The head of the White House said in a phone call earlier this week with Russian President Vladimir Putin he made a clear stance that the US and Russia may have “gone further,” emphasizing that Washington “did not want to arrest. the beginning of a cycle of escalation and conflict “with Moscow.

Mr. Biden asserted that after direct communication between him and Putin, the US and Russia could establish “a more effective relationship” and the Kremlin boss “agreed” with this view.

According to Biden, his proposal to hold a summit with his Russian counterpart this summer in Europe will be an opportunity to launch a stable strategic dialogue.

Putin has yet to react to the White House boss’s invitation, but Biden said his cabinet is discussing the possibility now.

Before that, despite President Biden proposing a bilateral meeting with his Russian counterpart, on April 15, the US still announced economic sanctions against Russia and expelled 10 foreign diplomats. This was in response to actions that Washington alleged was “interference” by the Kremlin in US elections and large-scale cyber attacks.

In addition, the US Treasury Department also announced sanctions against 8 individuals and entities involved in Russia’s annexation of Crimea.

For its part, the Kremlin vowed to respond adequately to any new illegal US sanctions against Russia and noted that any new sanctions would reduce the chances of a meeting. two sides summit.

Russian President and US President – documentary photo.

On April 15, the administration of US President Joe Biden intends to impose new sanctions on many Russian individuals and organizations.

The US news agency, citing some well-informed sources, said Washington would punish 30 entities in Russia and expel 10 officials from the United States.

This is part of the US response to Russia over accusations that Moscow is the culprit behind large-scale cyber attacks against US software supply chain SolarWinds in December last year.

Through that attack, the hackers gain access to the data of thousands of companies and government offices that are partners of Solar Winds.

However, the Russian side has always strongly rejected and affirmed that it had prepared the scenario to deal with the worst situations.

Official sources from the White House, the State Department and the US Treasury Department have not officially announced or responded to the leaked information.

If confirmed, this is the “pain” of the US and Russia at the moment when the tense relationship between the two countries is falling into disagreement regarding the hot spot on the Russia-Ukraine border.

Earlier, this disagreement led the US to send two destroyers to the Black Sea towards Russia to show support for Ukraine.

However, after Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Joe Biden made a phone call and the two sides agreed to hold a summit meeting in the near future, the US stopped the plan to destroy the USS Theodore Roosevelt and USS destroyers. Donald Cook into the Black Sea.

Turkey has received notification of this route change. This is a move that is expected to help cool the situation in Ukraine and ease tensions between the US and Russia.

Thus, in combination with the frigate developments and the US administration’s imposition of sanctions on Russia, it can be seen that the Biden administration probably wants to demonstrate the diplomatic stance with Moscow, which he immediately identified. from the beginning.

That is the US will react strongly to protect national interests against Russian actions such as accusations of cyber attacks, election interference … but will not make too much tension in matters related to international affairs. .

Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Joe Biden.

The sanctions are part of the US government’s response to Russia’s election meddling in the US and the launch of the SolarWinds cyber attack last December, according to the New York Times.

Sources say that among the Russian citizens that the US is preparing to impose sanctions are both government officials and intelligence services.

The Wall Street Journal also cited sources as saying that US President Joe Biden would issue a decree extending a ban on US banks from conducting transactions related to Russia’s national debt.

Earlier in January, the US Agency for Cyber ​​Security and Infrastructure (CISA) issued a joint statement by the FBI and several other agencies, under which Russia is likely to be behind the attack. Large-scale networks targeted at customers of the computer security firm SolarWinds.

According to Washington, the goal of the attack was to gather intelligence. However, it was later reported that the attackers did not gain access to sensitive information.

In mid-March, US intelligence released a new report, accusing Russian President Vladimir Putin of directing the Russian government’s influence campaigns to reduce the likelihood of Democratic candidate Joe Biden’s victory in elections in 2020 and deepening political divisions in America.

Advisor to US President Joe Biden on national security Jake Sullivan recently stated that in response to this attack the White House is ready to use a variety of methods, not only sanctions but also “tangible and intangible” tools.

The New York Times also wrote that the US is planning to carry out “secret counterattacks” on Russian systems.

The Kremlin rated the allegations as “completely unfounded” and said that this was just an excuse for the new sanctions. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russia did not interfere in the US election and was not involved in cyber attacks.

The US intends to punish a series of Russian diplomats.

Accordingly, 12 Russian individuals, including intelligence officials and government officials, and 20 other entities in the US sanctions category.

In addition, Washington is also preparing to expel 10 Russian diplomats.

Just last week, Bloomberg reported that the US administration had completed an intelligence assessment of Russia’s potential role in a cyberattack against SolarWinds and meddling in the 2020 presidential election.

The White House is considering actions against US diplomats, including punishing Russian President Vladimir Putin’s advisers and agencies involved in allegations of election interference.

In mid-March, US intelligence released a new report, alleging that Putin had authorized the Russian government’s “influence activities” to undermine the then Democratic candidate. Biden in the 2020 election and exacerbated political divisions in the US.

The Kremlin considers the report “completely unfounded and unfounded” and expressed its belief that this is just an excuse to introduce new sanctions. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov stressed that Russia does not interfere in the US vote, is not involved in the campaign against any candidate. He also noted that Washington’s sanctions policy could exacerbate bilateral relations.

One day earlier, the RIA news agency quoted information from the Russian Foreign Ministry as saying that Russia would act decisively if the US took new “unfriendly steps” such as imposing sanctions.

The same day, the White House announced that the new US administration would work towards a stable relationship with Russia, but to seek predictability rather than trust between the two countries.

Meanwhile, Mr. Biden recently offered to have a face-to-face conference with the Russian president in a European country. The Russian president just “wished him well” and invited Mr. Biden to a face-to-face conversation after hearing that the US President agreed with the view that Putin was a “murderer”.

.