Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 723 posts

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#451

Post by sn_master »

dilap wrote: post #273
sn_master wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having US data in US hands doesn't seem like a terrible development to me. In China, the relationship between tech companies and the government is very close, and none would question any data requests. Its nothing like Apple which openly fights the US government in the supreme court..

Apple fights to not be forced to unlock phones, which is admirable, but they'll happily turn over your iCloud data. To me the greater outrage is that the president can arbitrarily decide which apps citizens may or may not use. I would like to make that choice for myself, thank you very much.

Is that an abuse of power? Probably yes. Do I agree with it? Absolutely yes, because it is for the greater good of the citizens of the country.

Do I like Trump in general? Absolutely not, but I also don't automatically start cursing any decision he makes just because its made by him without trying to use two brain cells to analyze it first.

I feel safer knowing US data can be accessed by US government entities than foreign ones, specially ones that have a documented track record of industrial espionage against the country. Can't imagine what good can come off the Chinese government having access to PII and potential backdoor capabilities (e.g. the clipboard scandal) of tens of millions of children of US engineers/politicians/workers.

Is there a single reason why that can be good for the US citizens?

The choice of the president wasn't about the "app" itself. It was about the data being stored in foreign lands. If the app didn't have copious amounts of data of US citizens, he wouldn't have cared, even if it had a 100% user base in the US.

Europe has very similar rules on EU data being stored in EU data centers. Germany is a good example of those policies and no one seems to critisize them, because no one "blanket-hates" European leaders like they do to Trump.

The decision to ban was because TikTok didn't seem to be willing to cooperate to fix the data locality problem. Had they promised and started moving their data centers to the US, I doubt this would have happened. The acquisition by MS if happens, would do just that and allow the app to continue being used.

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#453

Post by ekianjo »

billfruit wrote: post #195

As someone from the third world this leaves a very bad feeling if it happens. I do expect it runs into legal hurdles before that. Neither Apple nor Google have found TikTok problematic enough to delist them from their app stores. Neither is there charges that TikTok may have broken US laws. Banning something which hasn't broken US laws, on arbitrary grounds shouldn't be possible. The President shouldn't have authorit…

> The President shouldn't have authority to ban anything at all let alone an app available through privately operated app stores.

China routinely ban anything they don't like. How do you feel about that? Do you make appeal to fair competition to them?

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#454

Post by albacur »

wildrhythms wrote: post #429
albacur wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Chinese policy seems to have not significantly changed in the last 5 years towards the US, but on the other hand US seemed ever more keen and eger to pursue a hostile attitude towards China. For decades, China has blocked U.S. companies from fair competition, reneged on trade deals when it suits them, backed out of industrial partnerships after extracting the IP it deems useful, and generally been a bad trade partn…

The rationale in your comment is unconvincing to me. If Tiktok is breaking the law, that should come to light and be actioned like any other company breaking the law; likewise TOS violations on respective app stores. I haven't seen any reports to suggest that Tiktok is breaking U.S. law, have you? And if the rationale is, as you suggested, a retaliation against 'bad behavior for decades', what precedent would banning…

My comment wasn't specific to TikTok, but rather OP's assertion that the U.S. is a hostile actor, whereas China is just being China.

Regarding TikTok, foreign-owned companies must follow U.S. laws, which are subject to due process. Additionally, they must not pose an imminent threat to national security. For better or worse, the government tends to be tight-lipped about matters of national security and isn't compelled to divulge details to the public. Normally, this is acceptable because we trust our government to act responsibility and in our best interest. Is TikTok a legitimate threat to security? I don't know, and with Trump's tendency to make everything look like a publicity stunt, my trust in the government to use its power responsibly is not very high.

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#456

Post by jjcon »

osrec wrote: post #363
billfruit wrote: post #195

As someone from the third world this leaves a very bad feeling if it happens. I do expect it runs into legal hurdles before that. Neither Apple nor Google have found TikTok problematic enough to delist them from their app stores. Neither is there charges that TikTok may have broken US laws. Banning something which hasn't broken US laws, on arbitrary grounds shouldn't be possible. The President shouldn't have authorit…

I honestly feel the ban may well be a direct result of Tiktok users helping boycott a political rally in Tulsa. They were expecting hundreds of thousands to turn up, but only a few thousand turned up, leaving the organisers utterly embarrassed.

Why did India already ban it with Japan and Australia about to then?

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#457

Post by arrosenberg »

chrischen wrote: post #368
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that it justifies our behavior, but I can’t help but cringe a bit when considering how China locks American companies out of its market but expects better access for Chinese companies in the American market. America-Chinese relations started going downhill in 2009 when China thought it prudent to start blocking most Americans services, America just took a decade to follow up with similar bad behavior.

Because we believe in the free market and they believe in a controlled market? I mean, are you suggesting we also move the planned economy model because China is right? It’s not like we adopted a free market model for the benefit of foreign interests... it’s simply a better model (in our belief) for creating a healthy economy.

> Because we believe in the free market and they believe in a controlled market?

We pay lip service to the free market, but in practice we believe in controlled, privately owned markets and China believes in controlled, state owned markets.

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#458

Post by hhsuey »

quotemstr wrote: post #409
albacur wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Chinese policy seems to have not significantly changed in the last 5 years towards the US, but on the other hand US seemed ever more keen and eger to pursue a hostile attitude towards China. For decades, China has blocked U.S. companies from fair competition, reneged on trade deals when it suits them, backed out of industrial partnerships after extracting the IP it deems useful, and generally been a bad trade partn…

The problem here isn't TikTok being banned. I couldn't care less about TikTok. The problem here is singling out an individual entity for punishment outside an established framework of laws just because we don't like it . You can be tough on China without becoming China. Nobody is suggesting that China's trade policy go unchallenged. What I do want is a policy including evidence, recourse, and the possibility of compl…

> You can be tough on China without becoming China.

Honest question. Do you know how this could be done? I'm not too familiar with foreign affairs.

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#459

Post by spideymans »

wolco wrote: post #411
spideymans wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course TikTok won’t be growing at the same rate in 10 years time. That doesn’t mean it won’t still be a huge platform, however. In fact, I’d wager that, it TikTok plays their cards right, the platform could be bigger than YouTube within five years or so. I know it sounds crazy now, but there is nothing that dictates that YouTube’s model is the best for delivering democratized video publishing to the masses. I find…

TikTok is not a threat to youtube. Instagram maybe. Everyone has a place. Short videos on youtube are not rewarding and accounts are centered usually around one topic. On tiktok you follow a person who posts videos.. which are like moving instagram pictures . Instagram has been pushing videos but people are sharing more live stream longer content. The next big site will be pornhub meets tiktok. 90 seconds or less x-r…

> The next big site will be pornhub meets tiktok. 90 seconds or less x-rated content that is connected to patreon and your tiktok profile

Ha, not sure if this was supposed to be a joke or not, but that’s arguably what lead Tumblr’s rise to prominence, and also their demise when the porn ban was implemented

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#460

Post by hhsuey »

arrosenberg wrote: post #457
chrischen wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because we believe in the free market and they believe in a controlled market? I mean, are you suggesting we also move the planned economy model because China is right? It’s not like we adopted a free market model for the benefit of foreign interests... it’s simply a better model (in our belief) for creating a healthy economy.

> Because we believe in the free market and they believe in a controlled market? We pay lip service to the free market, but in practice we believe in controlled, privately owned markets and China believes in controlled, state owned markets.

Just randomly thinking out loud: Is it possible to stop privately owned markets without the state having more control? I suppose the concern is with large private corporations, as opposed to smaller to medium sized businesses. I think that's what a lot of Democrats want to do, but I often associate them with bigger government. I know very little about politics though.
Post reply on HN