A Deep Deep 3D Sea of Stars Universe Seen by the ESO’s VLT Telescope

""By taking very long exposure pictures of regions of the sky with the Hubble Space Telescope, astronomers have created so-called ‘deep fields’ that have revealed much about the early Universe.

The first deep field, the Hubble Deep Field North, was observed over ten consecutive days during Christmas 1995.

The resulting image consisted of 342 separate exposures, with a total exposure time of more than 100 hours, compared with typical Hubble exposures of a few hours.

The observed region of sky in Ursa Major was carefully selected to be as empty as possible so that Hubble would look far beyond the stars of our own Milky Way and out past nearby galaxies.

The results were astonishing – almost 3,000 galaxies were seen in the image.

In 1996 it was decided to observe a second deep field, the Hubble Deep Field South, to assess whether the Hubble Deep Field North was indeed a special area and thus not representative of the Universe as a whole. This time the field also contained a quasar, which was used as a cosmological lighthouse and provided valuable information about the matter between the quasar and the Earth.

These images gave astronomers a peephole to the ancient Universe for the first time, and caused a real revolution in modern astronomy.

But they did not hold all the answers — to find out more about the galaxies in the images, astronomers had to carefully look at each one with other instruments, a difficult and time-consuming job.

Now, for the first time, VLT’s MUSE instrument can do both jobs at once.""

http://www.sci-news.com/astronomy/science-esos-vlt-telescope-deep-universe-3d-02543.html

Human Designated Cognitive Mystery Gene Touted as Genetic Trait for Brain Size Modifier in DNA

""Led by Wieland Huttner, director of the Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics, the researchers said the brain's neocortex gets a neuron boost to fuel functions such as reasoning, language and sensory perception. These traits are what make the human brain the most complex in the animal kingdom.

"Our ultimate goal has always been to identify the changes in the genome that were responsible for us humans having larger brains than other primates," Huttner told the Guardian. "What we now have is a gene that is characteristic of a 1.3 liter to 1.4 liter brain, and that makes it very exciting."

For their study, the researchers injected the gene into mouse embryos, which in turn caused their brains to grow larger and develop wrinkles known to fit more tissue in the skull.

"Will they learn better, or have better memories? That's hard to say. But we should know that later this year," Huttner said. "We saw cortical folding in half of the mice. So the gene is sufficient to do that, but it won't necessarily do it every time."

But Huttner and his team will have to wait for the mice to grow older so their brains can develop. Afterward, the researchers will see if the gene also increases the mice's cognitive abilities.""

http://www.universityherald.com/articles/16325/20150227/human-specific-gene-regulates-brain-size-various-cognitive-abilities.htm

Technologies Breakthroughs for Rechargeable Batteries Revitalizes Cleaner Energy Usages

""Researchers from Singapore’s Institute of Bioengineering and Nanotechnology (IBN) of A*STAR and Quebec’s IREQ (Hydro-Québec’s research institute) have synthesized a new material that they say could more than double the energy capacity of lithium-ion batteries, allowing for longer-lasting rechargeable batteries for electric vehicles and mobile devices.""

nanoboxes used in the new battery cathode material

""The new material for battery cathodes (the + battery pole) in based on a “lithium orthosilicate-related” compound,  Li2MnSiO4, combining lithium, manganese, silicon and oxygen, which the researchers found superior to conventional phosphate-based cathodes. They report an high initial charging capacity of 335 mAh/g (milliAmpere-hours per gram) in the journal Nano Energy.

“IBN researchers have successfully achieved simultaneous control of the phase purity and nanostructure of Li2MnSiO4 for the first time,” said Professor Jackie Y. Ying, IBN Executive Director. “This novel synthetic approach would allow us to move closer to attaining the ultrahigh theoretical capacity of silicate-based cathodes for battery applications.""

http://www.kurzweilai.net/a-breakthrough-in-rechargeable-batteries-for-electronic-devices-and-electric-vehicles

""Not all batteries are created equal". The first ever rechargeable AA/AAA batteries that allows direct micro-USB charging without the need for an external battery cradle""

""Even in today’s world, the reliance on standard AA/AAA batteries is ever increasing. It's a $40+ Billion dollar industry that provides assistance in our everyday lives, but also creates a substantial amount of waste at the same time. Batteries are used for almost everything that’s handheld like remotes, cameras, flashlights, alarm clocks, medical devices, etc. When those batteries run out, they’re usually simply thrown out. Those that choose to be a bit more eco-friendly have the option of using rechargeable batteries, but even those come with some inconveniences.

The concept of rechargeable batteries has been around for decades, but these come with bulky cradles that would hold a handful of batteries at once and allow simultaneous recharging. This cradle also needed to be carried around when on travel to make sure devices were well powered while away from home.  

Technology has advanced much since then and in today’s market, there are even AA/AAA batteries that can be charged using a standard USB port. However, the USB plug will take up quite an amount of space thus reducing the battery capacity as well as structural integrity since the top of the battery must be removed in order to plug the battery into a USB port for charging.

This is where Lightors comes into play. Lightors offers an innovative alternative to rechargeable batteries without the fuss of using an external charging cradle. Much of today’s mobile devices use micro-USB as a standard for charging, but these cables are usually reserved for charging a single device. Lightors brings new use for your existing micro-USB cables and were designed to offer maximum battery capacity while being eco-friendly and re-usable. With its built-in micro-USB port, Lightors can be charged directly using any existing cable around your home or office (it comes with one too).

Lightors can be charged over 500 times  and will drastically reduce costs on purchasing additional batteries and reduce the amount of waste that gets created from throwing out traditional batteries. When the power runs out, simply plug them back in and a light will indicate that charging is complete.""

http://kseed.newswire.com/press-release/lightors-introduces-revolutionary-micro-usb-rechargeable-aa-aaa

Threats of Fresh Sanctions Over Ukraine: Russia Slams the West's Continued Involvement

""Russia warned Western countries against imposing more sanctions on Moscow, saying such threats show the West is opposed to following through on a truce for eastern Ukraine.

Both the United States and some leaders in Europe have threatened to impose tougher sanctions against Moscow if it does not stop supporting pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Thursday called those threats an attempt to "deflect attention" from the need to follow through on the terms of a cease-fire, which has only recently begun to take hold.

"Behind these calls are hidden the lack of desire of these actors - the corresponding countries, organizations, the United States, the European Union - to achieve what was laid out in the Minsk agreements," Lavrov said at a news conference.

Weapons withdrawal

Also on Thursday, Ukrainian troops have begun withdrawing artillery from a frontline eastern village near the devastated town of Debaltseve, under the watchful eye of European monitors overseeing a cease-fire deal reached earlier this month.

Military officials on Thursday showed reporters from the Reuters news agency trucks towing 100-millimeter guns from the village of Paraskoviyvka, as Kyiv acknowledged a marked reduction in rebel attacks in the past three days.

For a second straight day on Thursday, Ukraine's military officials reported no combat fatalities in the regions near the Russian border, boosting prospects that an internationally brokered truce reached February 12 will hold.  Kyiv authorities, however, said its withdrawal timetable could be adjusted if army positions are attacked.""

Temporary Cease Fire:

http://www.voanews.com/content/russia-slams-western-threats-of-fresh-sanctions-over-ukraine/2659824.html

Tall Tale Legendary Catfish Mammoth: 280-Pounder Caught by Fisherman in Italy

""A 280 pound catfish was caught by a fisherman in Italy. According to USA Today Sports, Dino Ferrari caught the huge fish in Po Delta. While the catfish caught by Ferrari was 8.7 feet in length and weighed 280 pounds, the largest catfish ever caught weighed 300 pounds. That does not mean that this wasn’t a record-breaking fish, however. According to the report, this might be the largest catfish ever caught using a generic fishing rod.

According to the San Antonio Express-News, any catfish over 6.5 feet is considered extremely rare. Ferrari isn’t some small time fisherman, either. According to Grind TV, the Italy native is a pro at catching big Wels catfish, and many of these fish frequent the waters where Ferrari casts his line.

“The wels catfish is the second-largest freshwater fish in its region, ranking behind the beluga sturgeon. The largest beluga sturgeon on record is reportedly 3,463 pounds.”

The 280 pound catfish is certainly a sight to see, as it looks as if it could swallow Ferrari whole. He posed for photos with the fish, clearly very proud of his catch (even appearing to hug it while his brother took some pictures), which took him a tiring 40 minutes to reel in. It is almost hard to believe that catfish can get that big!

Animal lovers may be happy to know that Ferrari did not keep the catfish, nor did he sell it for money. After his brother took a couple of pictures of the creature, the guys released it back into the river, where it swam off, happy to live another day.

As previously reported by the Inquisitr, these Wels catfish aren’t exactly harmless; this certainly is not the type of sea creature that you would want to swim into. And it is definitely not a “gentle giant” by any means.""

Fish Tale:

http://www.inquisitr.com/1872155/280-pound-catfish-fisherman-makes-huge-catch-in-italy-catfish-might-set-record/

FCC Re-Classifies Internet From 'Info-Service' to a 'Tele-Service' (ALT ~Laws & Regulations), How Predictable… It Voted on Strict Party Lines to Adopt Obama’s 332 Page “Net Neutrality” Proposal

""How predictable… The Federal Communications Commission voted on strict party lines to adopt Obama’s 332 page “Net Neutrality” proposal. Given that everything the government touches ends up as a rousing success-story, I’m sure you’ll be able to keep your internet if you like your internet. According to Fox News:

The commission, following a contentious meeting, voted 3-2 to adopt its so-called net neutrality plan -- a proposal that remained secret in the run-up to the final vote. On its surface, the plan is aimed at barring service providers from creating paid "fast lanes" on the Internet, which consumer advocates and Internet companies worry would edge out cash-strapped startups and smaller Internet-based businesses. Chairman Tom Wheeler said it would ensure an "open, unfettered network."

Of course… Because if there is one thing the government is known for it is protecting truly free markets, right? At issue is a concern that service providers might unfairly target certain companies for preferential (or discriminatory) treatment. However, I can’t help but notice that this is largely a problem that doesn’t actually exist. Apparently the big government fanatics over at Obama’s FCC believe it is prudent governance to restrict freedom because someone might(someday) abuse it.

How terribly Orwellian. I think George Washington is credited with a quote about such overzealous governance:

"It will be found an unjust and unwise jealousy to deprive a man of his natural liberty upon the supposition he may abuse it."

Democrats fear that a lack of competition within the industry is leading to monopolistic injustice; and evidently believe that slapping a 21st century technology with rules designed for rotary telephones, will somehow level the playing field. (I call it socialism for broadband… Let’s make sure everyone has equally atrocious internet service.)""

Micromanaging the Internet is Real

http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/michaelschaus/2015/02/27/fcc-approves-socialism-for-broadband-n1962981

Fairness Doctrine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

""The Fairness Doctrine was a policy of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, that required the holders of broadcast licenses to both present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission's view, honest, equitable and balanced. The FCC eliminated the Doctrine in 1987, and in August 2011 the FCC formally removed the language that implemented the Doctrine.^[1]

The Fairness Doctrine had two basic elements: It required broadcasters to devote some of their airtime to discussing controversial matters of public interest, and to air contrasting views regarding those matters. Stations were given wide latitude as to how to provide contrasting views: It could be done through news segments, public affairs shows, or editorials. The doctrine did not require equal time for opposing views but required that contrasting viewpoints be presented.^[2]

The main agenda for the doctrine was to ensure that viewers were exposed to a diversity of viewpoints. In 1969 the United States Supreme Court upheld the FCC's general right to enforce the Fairness Doctrine where channels were limited. But the courts did not rule that the FCC was obliged to do so.^[3] The courts reasoned that the scarcity of the broadcast spectrum, which limited the opportunity for access to the airwaves, created a need for the Doctrine. However, the proliferation of cable television, multiple channels within cable, public-access channels, and the Internet have eroded this argument, since there are plenty of places for ordinary individuals to make public comments on controversial issues at low or no cost at all.

The Fairness Doctrine should not be confused with the Equal Time rule. The Fairness Doctrine deals with discussion of controversial issues, while the Equal Time rule deals only with political candidates.""

Application of the Doctrine by the FCC[edit]

""In 1974, the Federal Communications Commission stated that the Congress had delegated it the power to mandate a system of "access, either free or paid, for person or groups wishing to express a viewpoint on a controversial public issue..." but that it had not yet exercised that power because licensed broadcasters had "voluntarily" complied with the "spirit" of the doctrine. It warned that:

“

Should future experience indicate that the doctrine [of 'voluntary compliance'] is inadequate, either in its expectations or in its results, the Commission will have the opportunity—and the responsibility—for such further reassessment and action as would be mandated.""[9] (((Now Censored as it is in  Violation of Telecommunications Laws))) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine VOID! Declared Unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court -- June 26, 1997    Communications Decency Act                  Enacted by the U.S. Congress on February 1, 1996 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; REFERENCES.      (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Telecommunications Act of 1996''.      (b) References.--Except as otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a section or other provision, the reference shall be considered to be made to a section or other provision of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 151 et seq.). ....                 TITLE V--OBSCENITY AND VIOLENCE   Subtitle A--Obscene, Harassing, and Wrongful Utilization of                  Telecommunications Facilities SEC. 501. SHORT TITLE.      This title may be cited as the ``Communications Decency Act of 1996''. SEC. 502. OBSCENE OR HARASSING USE OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES UNDER THE COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934.      Section 223 (47 U.S.C. 223) is amended--           (1) by striking subsection (a) and inserting in lieu thereof:      ``(a) Whoever--           ``(1) in interstate or foreign communications--                ``(A) by means of a telecommunications device knowingly--                     ``(i) makes, creates, or solicits, and                     ``(ii) initiates the transmission of,           any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication           which is obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent, with intent to annoy, abuse,           threaten, or harass another person;                ``(B) by means of a telecommunications device knowingly--                     ``(i) makes, creates, or solicits, and                     ``(ii) initiates the transmission of,           any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication           which is obscene or indecent, knowing that the recipient of the communication is           under 18 years of age, regardless of whether the maker of such communication           placed the call or initiated the communication;                ``(C) makes a telephone call or utilizes a telecommunications device,           whether or not conversation or communication ensues, without disclosing his           identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person at the           called number or who receives the communications;                ``(D) makes or causes the telephone of another repeatedly or continuously           to ring, with intent to harass any person at the called number; or                ``(E) makes repeated telephone calls or repeatedly initiates communication           with a telecommunications device, during which conversation or communication           ensues, solely to harass any person at the called number or who receives the           communication; or           ``(2) knowingly permits any telecommunications facility under his control to be      used for any activity prohibited by paragraph (1) with the intent that it be used for such      activity, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.''; and           (2) by adding at the end the following new subsections:      ``(d) Whoever--           ``(1) in interstate or foreign communications knowingly--                ``(A) uses an interactive computer service to send to a specific person or           persons under 18 years of age, or                ``(B) uses any interactive computer service to display in a manner           available to a person under 18 years of age,      any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication that, in      context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary      community standards, sexual or excretory activities or organs, regardless of whether the      user of such service placed the call or initiated the communication; or           ``(2) knowingly permits any telecommunications facility under such person's      control to be used for an activity prohibited by paragraph (1) with the intent that it be      used for such activity, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.      ``(e) In addition to any other defenses available by law:           ``(1) No person shall be held to have violated subsection (a) or (d) solely for      providing access or connection to or from a facility, system, or network not under that      person's control, including transmission, downloading, intermediate storage, access      software, or other related capabilities that are incidental to providing such access or      connection that does not include the creation of the content of the communication.           ``(2) The defenses provided by paragraph (1) of this subsection shall not be      applicable to a person who is a conspirator with an entity actively involved in the creation      or knowing distribution of communications that violate this section, or who knowingly      advertises the availability of such communications.           ``(3) The defenses provided in paragraph (1) of this subsection shall not be      applicable to a person who provides access or connection to a facility, system, or network      engaged in the violation of this section that is owned or controlled by such person.           ``(4) No employer shall be held liable under this section for the actions of an      employee or agent unless the employee's or agent's conduct is within the scope of his or      her employment or agency and the employer (A) having knowledge of such conduct,      authorizes or ratifies such conduct, or (B) recklessly disregards such conduct.           ``(5) It is a defense to a prosecution under subsection (a)(1)(B) or (d), or under      subsection (a)(2) with respect to the use of a facility for an activity under subsection      (a)(1)(B) that a person--                ``(A) has taken, in good faith, reasonable, effective, and appropriate           actions under the circumstances to restrict or prevent access by minors to a           communication specified in such subsections, which may involve any appropriate           measures to restrict minors from such communications, including any method           which is feasible under available technology; or                ``(B) has restricted access to such communication by requiring use of a           verified credit card, debit account, adult access code, or adult personal           identification number.           ``(6) The Commission may describe measures which are reasonable, effective,      and appropriate to restrict access to prohibited communications under subsection (d).      Nothing in this section authorizes the Commission to enforce, or is intended to provide      the Commission with the authority to approve, sanction, or permit, the use of such      measures. The Commission shall have no enforcement authority over the failure to utilize      such measures. The Commission shall not endorse specific products relating to such      measures. The use of such measures shall be admitted as evidence of good faith efforts      for purposes of paragraph (5) in any action arising under subsection (d). Nothing in this      section shall be construed to treat interactive computer services as common carriers or      telecommunications carriers.      ``(f)(1) No cause of action may be brought in any court or administrative agency against any person on account of any activity that is not in violation of any law punishable by criminal or civil penalty, and that the person has taken in good faith to implement a defense authorized under this section or otherwise to restrict or prevent the transmission of, or access to, a communication specified in this section.      ``(2) No State or local government may impose any liability for commercial activities or actions by commercial entities, nonprofit libraries, or institutions of higher education in connection with an activity or action described in subsection (a)(2) or (d) that is inconsistent with the treatment of those activities or actions under this section: Provided, however, That nothing herein shall preclude any State or local government from enacting and enforcing complementary oversight, liability, and regulatory systems, procedures, and requirements, so long as such systems, procedures, and requirements govern only intrastate services and do not result in the imposition of inconsistent rights, duties or obligations on the provision of interstate services. Nothing in this subsection shall preclude any State or local government from governing conduct not covered by this section.      ``(g) Nothing in subsection (a), (d), (e), or (f) or in the defenses to prosecution under (a) or (d) shall be construed to affect or limit the application or enforcement of any other Federal law.      ``(h) For purposes of this section--           ``(1) The use of the term `telecommunications device' in this section--                ``(A) shall not impose new obligations on broadcasting station licensees           and cable operators covered by obscenity and indecency provisions elsewhere in           this Act; and                ``(B) does not include an interactive computer service.           ``(2) The term `interactive computer service' has the meaning provided in section      230(e)(2).           ``(3) The term `access software' means software (including client or server      software) or enabling tools that do not create or provide the content of the communication      but that allow a user to do any one or more of the following:                ``(A) filter, screen, allow, or disallow content;                ``(B) pick, choose, analyze, or digest content; or                ``(C) transmit, receive, display, forward, cache, search, subset, organize,           reorganize, or translate content.           ``(4) The term `institution of higher education' has the meaning provided in      section 1201 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1141).           ``(5) The term `library' means a library eligible for participation in State-based      plans for funds under title III of the Library Services and Construction Act (20 U.S.C.      355e et seq.).''. SEC. 503. OBSCENE PROGRAMMING ON CABLE TELEVISION.      Section 639 (47 U.S.C. 559) is amended by striking ``not more than $10,000'' and inserting ``under title 18, United States Code,''. SEC. 504. SCRAMBLING OF CABLE CHANNELS FOR NONSUBSCRIBERS.      Part IV of title VI (47 U.S. C. 551 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``SEC. 640. SCRAMBLING OF CABLE CHANNELS FOR NONSUBSCRIBERS.      ``(a) Subscriber Request.--Upon request by a cable service subscriber, a cable operator shall, without charge, fully scramble or otherwise fully block the audio and video programming of each channel carrying such programming so that one not a subscriber does not receive it.      ``(b) Definition.--As used in this section, the term `scramble' means to rearrange the content of the signal of the programming so that the programming cannot be viewed or heard in an understandable manner.''. SEC. 505. SCRAMBLING OF SEXUALLY EXPLICIT ADULT VIDEO SERVICE PROGRAMMING.      (a) Requirement.--Part IV of title VI (47 U.S.C. 551 et seq.), as amended by this Act, is further amended by adding at the end the following: ``SEC. 641. SCRAMBLING OF SEXUALLY EXPLICIT ADULT VIDEO SERVICE PROGRAMMING.      ``(a) Requirement.--In providing sexually explicit adult programming or other programming that is indecent on any channel of its service primarily dedicated to sexually-oriented programming, a multichannel video programming distributor s otherwise fully block the video and audio portion of such channel so that one not a subscriber to such channel or programming does not receive it.      ``(b) Implementation.--Until a multichannel video programming distributor complies with the requirement set forth in subsection (a), the distributor shall limit the access of children to the programming referred to in that subsection by not providing such programming during the hours of the day (as determined by the Commission) when a significant number of children are likely to view it.      ``(c) Definition.--As used in this section, the term `scramble' means to rearrange the content of the signal of the programming so that the programming cannot be viewed or heard in an understandable manner.''.      (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall take effect 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act. SEC. 506. CABLE OPERATOR REFUSAL TO CARRY CERTAIN PROGRAMS.      (a) Public, Educational, and Governmental Channels.--Section 611(e) (47 U.S.C. 531(e)) is amended by inserting before the period the following: ``, except a cable operator may refuse to transmit any public access program or portion of a public access program which contains obscenity, indecency, or nudity''.      (b) Cable Channels for Commercial Use.--Section 612(c)(2) (47 U.S.C. 532(c)(2)) is amended by striking ``an operator'' and inserting ``a cable operator may refuse to transmit any leased access program or portion of a leased access program which contains obscenity, indecency, or nudity and''. SEC. 507. CLARIFICATION OF CURRENT LAWS REGARDING COMMUNICATION OF OBSCENE MATERIALS THROUGH THE USE OF COMPUTERS.      (a) Importation or Transportation.--Section 1462 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--           (1) in the first undesignated paragraph, by inserting ``or interactive computer      service (as defined in section 230(e)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934)'' after      ``carrier''; and           (2)  in the second undesignated paragraph--                (A) by inserting ``or receives,'' after ``takes'';                (B) by inserting ``or interactive computer service (as defined in section           230(e)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934)'' after ``common carrier''; and                (C) by inserting ``or importation'' after ``carriage''.      (b) Transportation for Purposes of Sale or Distribution.--The first undesignated paragraph of section 1465 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--           (1) by striking ``transports in'' and inserting ``transports or travels in, or uses a      facility or means of,'';           (2) by inserting ``or an interactive computer service (as defined in section      230(e)(2) of the Communications Act of 1934) in or affecting such commerce'' after      ``foreign commerce'' the first place it appears;           (3) by striking ``, or knowingly travels in'' and all that follows through ``obscene      material in interstate or foreign commerce,'' and inserting ``of''.      (c) Interpretation.--The amendments made by this section are clarifying and shall not be interpreted to limit or repeal any prohibition contained in sections 1462 and 1465 of title 18, United States Code, before such amendment, under the rule established in United States v. Alpers, 338 U.S. 680 (1950). SEC. 508. COERCION AND ENTICEMENT OF MINORS.      Section 2422 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--           (1) by inserting ``(a)'' before ``Whoever knowingly''; and           (2) by adding at the end the following:      ``(b) Whoever, using any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, including the mail, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years to engage in prostitution or any sexual act for which any person may be criminally prosecuted, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.''. SEC. 509. ONLINE FAMILY EMPOWERMENT.      Title II of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new section: ``SEC. 230. PROTECTION FOR PRIVATE BLOCKING AND SCREENING OF OFFENSIVE MATERIAL.      ``(a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:           ``(1) The rapidly developing array of Internet and other interactive computer      services available to individual Americans represent an extraordinary advance in the      availability of educational and informational resources to our citizens.           ``(2) These services offer users a great degree of control over the information that      they receive, as well as the potential for even greater control in the future as technology      develops.           ``(3) The Internet and other interactive computer services offer a forum for a true      diversity of political discourse, unique opportunities for cultural development, and      myriad avenues for intellectual activity.           ``(4) The Internet and other interactive computer services have flourished, to the      benefit of all Americans, with a minimum of government regulation.           ``(5) Increasingly Americans are relying on interactive media for a variety of      political, educational, cultural, and entertainment services.      ``(b) Policy.--It is the policy of the United States--           ``(1) to promote the continued development of the Internet and other interactive      computer services and other interactive media;           ``(2) to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for      the Internet and other interactive computer services,  unfettered by Federal or State      regulation;           ``(3) to encourage the development of technologies which maximize user control      over what information is received by individuals, families, and schools who use the      Internet and other interactive computer services;           ``(4) to remove disincentives for the development and utilization of blocking and      filtering technologies that empower parents to restrict their children's access to      objectionable or inappropriate online material; and           ``(5) to ensure vigorous enforcement of Federal criminal laws to deter and punish      trafficking in obscenity, stalking, and harassment by means of computer.      ``(c) Protection for `Good Samaritan' Blocking and Screening of Offensive Material.--           ``(1) Treatment of publisher or speaker.--No provider or user of an      interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any      information provided by another information content provider.           ``(2) Civil liability.--No provider or user of an interactive computer service      shall be held liable on account of--                ``(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or           availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd,           lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable,           whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or                ``(B) any action taken to enable or make available to information content           providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in           paragraph (1).      ``(d) Effect on Other Laws.--           ``(1) No effect on criminal law.--Nothing in this section shall be construed to      impair the enforcement of section 223 of this Act, chapter 71 (relating to obscenity) or      110 (relating to sexual exploitation of children) of title 18, United States Code, or any      other Federal criminal statute.           ``(2) No effect on intellectual property law.--Nothing in this section shall      be construed to limit or expand any law pertaining to intellectual property.           ``(3) State law.--Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent any State      from enforcing any State law that is consistent with this section. No cause of action may      be brought and no liability may be imposed under any State or local law that is      inconsistent with this section.           ``(4) No effect on communications privacy law.--Nothing in this section      shall be construed to limit the application of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act      of 1986 or any of the amendments made by such Act, or any similar State law.      ``(e) Definitions.--As used in this section:           ``(1) Internet.--The term `Internet' means the international computer network of      both Federal and non-Federal interoperable packet switched data networks.           ``(2) Interactive computer service.--The term `interactive computer service'      means any information service, system, or access software provider that provides or      enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a      service or system that provides access to the Internet and such systems operated or      services offered by libraries or educational institutions.           ``(3) Information content provider.--The term `information content provider'      means any person or entity that is responsible, in whole or in part, for the creation or      development of information provided through the Internet or any other interactive      computer service.           ``(4) Access software provider.--The term `access software provider' means a      provider of software (including client or server software), or enabling tools that do any      one or more of the following:                ``(A) filter, screen, allow, or disallow content;                ``(B) pick, choose, analyze, or digest content; or                ``(C) transmit, receive, display, forward, cache, search, subset, organize,           reorganize, or translate content.''.                        Subtitle Bviolence SEC. 551. PARENTAL CHOICE IN TELEVISION PROGRAMMING.      (a) Findings.--The Congress makes the following findings:           (1) Television influences children's perception of the values and behavior that are      common and acceptable in society.           (2) Television station operators, cable television system operators, and video      programmers should follow practices in connection with video programming that take      into consideration that television broadcast and cable programming has established a      uniquely pervasive presence in the lives of American children.           (3) The average American child is exposed to 25 hours of television each week      and some children are exposed to as much as 11 hours of television a day.           (4) Studies have shown that children exposed to violent video programming at a      young age have a higher tendency for violent and aggressive behavior later in life than      children not so exposed, and that children exposed to violent video programming are      prone to assume that acts of violence are acceptable behavior.           (5) Children in the United States are, on average, exposed to an estimated 8,000      murders and 100,000 acts of violence on television by the time the child completes      elementary school.           (6) Studies indicate that children are affected by the pervasiveness and casual      treatment of sexual material on television, eroding the ability of parents to develop      responsible attitudes and behavior in their children.           (7) Parents express grave concern over violent and sexual video programming and      strongly support technology that would give them greater control to block video      programming in the home that they consider harmful to their children.           (8) There is a compelling governmental interest in empowering parents to limit      the negative influences of video programming that is harmful to children.           (9) Providing parents with timely information about the nature of upcoming video      programming and with the technological tools that allow them easily to block violent,      sexual, or other programming that they believe harmful to their children is a nonintrusive      and narrowly tailored means of achieving that compelling governmental interest.      (b) Establishment of Television Rating Code.--           (1) Amendment.--Section 303 (47 U.S.C. 303) is amended by adding at the end      the following:      ``(w) Prescribe--           ``(1) on the basis of recommendations from an advisory committee established by      the Commission in accordance with section 551(b)(2) of the Telecommunications Act of      1996, guidelines and recommended procedures for the identification and rating of video      programming that contains sexual, violent, or other indecent material about which parents      should be informed before it is displayed to children, provided that nothing in this      paragraph shall be construed to authorize any rating of video programming on the basis of      its political or religious content; and           ``(2) with respect to any video programming that has been rated, and in      consultation with the television industry, rules requiring distributors of such video      programming to transmit such rating to permit parents to block the display of video      programming that they have determined is inappropriate for their children.''.           (2) Advisory committee requirements.--In establishing an advisory committee      for purposes of the amendment made by paragraph (1) of this subsection, the      Commission shall--                (A) ensure that such committee is composed of parents, television           broadcasters, television programming producers, cable operators, appropriate           public interest groups, and other interested individuals from the private sector and           is fairly balanced in terms of political affiliation, the points of view represented,           and the functions to be performed by the committee;                (B) provide to the committee such staff and resources as may be necessary           to permit it to perform its functions efficiently and promptly; and                (C) require the committee to submit a final report of its recommendations           within one year after the date of the appointment of the initial members.      (c) Requirement for Manufacture of Televisions That Block Programs.--Section 303 (47 U.S.C. 303), as amended by subsection (a), is further amended by adding at the end the following:      ``(x) Require, in the case of an apparatus designed to receive television signals that are shipped in interstate commerce or manufactured in the United States and that have a picture screen 13 inches or greater in size (measured diagonally), that such apparatus be equipped with a feature designed to enable viewers to block display of all programs with a common rating, except as otherwise permitted by regulations pursuant to section 330(c)(4).''.      (d) Shipping of Televisions That Block Programs.--           (1) Regulations.--Section 330 (47 U.S.C. 330) is amended--                (A) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d); and                (B) by adding after subsection (b) the following new subsection (c):      ``(c)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), no person shall ship in interstate commerce or manufacture in the United States any apparatus described in section 303(x) of this Act except in accordance with rules prescribed by the Commission pursuant to the authority granted by that section.      ``(2) This subsection shall not apply to carriers transporting apparatus referred to in paragraph (1) without trading in it.      ``(3) The rules prescribed by the Commission under this subsection shall provide for the oversight by the Commission of the adoption of standards by industry for blocking technology. Such rules shall require that all such apparatus be able to receive the rating signals which have been transmitted by way of line 21 of the vertical blanking interval and which conform to the signal and blocking specifications established by industry under the supervision of the Commission.      ``(4) As new video technology is developed, the Commission shall take such action as the Commission determines appropriate to ensure that blocking service continues to be available to consumers. If the Commission determines that an alternative blocking technology exists that--           ``(A) enables parents to block programming based on identifying programs      without ratings,           ``(B) is available to consumers at a cost which is comparable to the cost of      technology that allows parents to block programming based on common ratings, and           ``(C) will allow parents to block a broad range of programs on a multichannel      system as effectively and as easily as technology that allows parents to block      programming based on common ratings, the Commission shall amend the rules prescribed pursuant to section 303(x) to require that the apparatus described in such section be equipped with either the blocking technology described in such section or the alternative blocking technology described in this paragraph.''.           (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 330(d), as redesignated by subsection      (d)(1)(A), is amended by striking ``section 303(s), and section 303(u)'' and inserting in      lieu thereof ``and sections 303(s), 303(u), and 303(x)''.      (e) Applicability and Effective Dates.--           (1) Applicability of rating provision.--The amendment made by subsection      (b) of this section shall take effect 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, but only      if the Commission determines, in consultation with appropriate public interest groups and      interested individuals from the private sector, that distributors of video programming      have not, by such date--                (A) established voluntary rules for rating video programming that contains           sexual, violent, or other indecent material about which parents should be informed           before it is displayed to children, and such rules are acceptable to the           Commission; and                (B) agreed voluntarily to broadcast signals that contain ratings of such           programming.           (2) Effective date of manufacturing provision.--In prescribing regulations to      implement the amendment made by subsection (c), the Federal Communications      Commission shall, after consultation with the television manufacturing industry, specify      the effective date for the applicability of the requirement to the apparatus covered by such      amendment, which date shall not be less than two years after the date of enactment of this      Act. SEC. 552. TECHNOLOGY FUND.      It is the policy of the United States to encourage broadcast television, cable, satellite, syndication, other video programming distributors, and relevant related industries (in consultation with appropriate public interest groups and interested individuals from the private sector) to--           (1) establish a technology fund to encourage television and electronics equipment      manufacturers to facilitate the development of technology which would empower parents      to block programming they deem inappropriate for their children and to encourage the      availability thereof to low income parents;           (2) report to the viewing public on the status of the development of affordable,      easy to use blocking technology; and           (3) establish and promote effective procedures, standards, systems, advisories, or      other mechanisms for ensuring that users have easy and complete access to the      information necessary to effectively utilize blocking technology and to encourage the      availability thereof to low income parents.                   Subtitle C--Judicial Review SEC. 561. EXPEDITED REVIEW.      (a) Three-Judge District Court Hearing.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any civil action challenging the constitutionality, on its face, of this title or any amendment made by this title, or any provision thereof, shall be heard by a district court of 3 judges convened pursuant to the provisions of section 2284 of title 28, United States Code.      (b) Appellate Review.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an interlocutory or final judgment, decree, or order of the court of 3 judges in an action under subsection (a) holding this title or an amendment made by this title, or any provision thereof, unconstitutional shall be reviewable as a matter of right by direct appeal to the Supreme Court. Any such appeal shall be filed not more than 20 days after entry of such judgment, decree, or order. https://epic.org/free_speech/cda/cda.html