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

631–640 of 723 posts

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

#631

Post by glaive123 »

vertis wrote: post #594
albacur wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 compelle…

The US is not really better for those of us that are not US citizens though. Yes, in theory, US stands for freedom and democracy, but any protections are protections for US citizens, not for Australian or EU citizens. So from a purely rights and spying perspective having the app be a US app vs a China app makes little difference to me (not that I'm young enough to be a TikTok user anyway). As soon as you add 'nationa…

Apparently you are not aware of China’s 2017 National Intelligence Law, which requires that “Any organization or citizen shall support, assist and cooperate with the state intelligence work in accordance with the law.” Unlike American companies who receive requests from the U.S. government, ByteDance simply has no recourse when faced with orders from China’s authoritarian government.

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

#632

Post by xvector »

mrtksn wrote: post #57

As I currently recide in a country famous for blocking access to websites, I follow these developments as closely as I can. Whatever happens, it's probably going to be a recipe on how to force all foreign providers to act the way the local government wants. These days the theme is forcing on the ant-gay stance, they managed to force Netflix a show that had a gay character in it. Besides that charade, they passed laws…

As a US citizen, I'm incredibly saddened and disappointed in how my fellow Americans fall for the "national security" excuse every single time.

You'd think we'd have learnt by now. We do not deserve the freedom we have since we clearly don't care about it. Just look at all of the pro-ban comments in this thread.

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

#633

Post by xvector »

gmantg wrote: post #350
e-clinton wrote: post #308

They’re banning TikTok because they don’t want a Chinese company having direct access to the location, camera, and microphones of hundreds of millions of Americans. I have the app installed and have all those permissions disabled. I understand that it seems unfair but I get where they’re coming from given that China isn’t exactly a saint when it comes to spying/civil rights. I think it Microsoft agrees to take owners…

Most smartphones are made in China, so CCP has access to them at the hardware level. My bet is that tiktok has hacked the human psychology: it's an equivalent of addictive sugary drink spiced with coke; it's a problem by itself, but it's a much bigger problem once we realise who manipulates the us citizens. I see tiktok as a backdoor into democracy: it can sway opinions of the masses or it can run social experiments.

And somehow it is okay for Facebook and Twitter to wield this power?

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

#634

Post by throwaway69123 »

flywheel wrote: post #571
throwaway69123 wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are focused on outputs what about inputs?

What inputs? You mean the fact that she follows cute dog videos? I'm sure China is going to use that against her somehow /s

Yes her data, meta data about your network, devices etc. Just because you arent a target based on that data, doesnt mean someone isnt.

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

#636

Post by Guffton »

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…

Is there a "third world" anymore?[1]

[1]https://www.gapminder.org/videos/hans-rosling-ted-2006-debun...

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

#637

Post by tom-_- »

tannedNerd wrote: post #625
tom-_- wrote: post #618

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So by this reasoning, if commenter responded with a emphatic "Am not!", that would somehow validate he's not a CCP agent? His response was a link to support a contentious claim which is that the security threat is overstated. That's a reasonable position.

No it’s not. He/she has a brand new account. Hacker News isn’t exactly a new site so users with new accounts need to prove they are trustworthy. It’s the exact reason why they flag new accounts, because if you are using a throwaway account you are doing something you don’t want tracked back to you. What’s your defense on that? Or are you rushing to defend another ccp account?

A flawed assumption: A new account does not mean it's a throwaway. The heretofore anonymous user may simply have found a topic worth commenting on. Secondly, my user is over 6 years old and I've not made any comments in favor or against the CCP in my entire history. I simply commented on what I find to be a logical fallacy. So I'm curious what you base your assumptions on.

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

#638

Post by getmeoutofhere »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #592
getmeoutofhere wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just ignored what I said and straw-manned the specific nature of being banned. As I said in my previous post, both can operate in China if they choose to comply with Chinese laws. Hotmail and iCloud do, and both works fine in China. Google and Facebook being banned is no different than if they'd been banned for not complying with GDPR in EU.

Again, China doesn’t officially ban Facebook or google, they won’t tell them what laws they aren’t following and anyways, China doesn’t really do rule of law. Google can’t go to a judge and say, ”hey, I want to prove I’m doing things right, see this Chinese constitution guarantees freedom of speech!” Nope, China doesn’t work like that, officials make opaque arbitrary decisions on what to allow or not.

Why are you purposely being unfaithful in your argument here? I can easily search up multiple cases where foreign companies have applied the rule of law and won in China. The rules are clear to Google and they simply chose not to follow it. They tried to follow to follow the rules with Project Dragonfly until their own employees scuttled the project, but that’s on Google.

The existence of Bing proves that it’s possible to operate a foreign search engine in China.

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

#639

Post by oldmartin »

getmeoutofhere wrote: post #638
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, China doesn’t officially ban Facebook or google, they won’t tell them what laws they aren’t following and anyways, China doesn’t really do rule of law. Google can’t go to a judge and say, ”hey, I want to prove I’m doing things right, see this Chinese constitution guarantees freedom of speech!” Nope, China doesn’t work like that, officials make opaque arbitrary decisions on what to allow or not.

Why are you purposely being unfaithful in your argument here? I can easily search up multiple cases where foreign companies have applied the rule of law and won in China. The rules are clear to Google and they simply chose not to follow it. They tried to follow to follow the rules with Project Dragonfly until their own employees scuttled the project, but that’s on Google. The existence of Bing proves that it’s possib…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN