Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns • Hacker News Board

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#111

Post by mindslight » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 5:10 PM UTC

12xo wrote: post #26

By far the most egregious overreach of Federal authority in recent memory. Noting about this is reasonable. Its 100% the act of a desperate and weak minded despot who knows nothing about technology but acts out of ignorance and pettiness. A truly illegal and Anti-American act.

I agree with where you're coming from, but really the underlying feeling is basically a rational response to the growing problem of surveillance capitalism. The rest of the world has just been a frog slowly boiling while USG siphons more and more of their citizens' information, but now there is a significant non-US player.

The right response would be something like a US GDPR, allowing US persons to opt out of surveillance foreign and domestic. But that would upset the Silicon Valley gravy train, so instead we get a ham-fisted response that deflects concern onto a tiny slice of the overall problem.

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#112

Post by supernova87a » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 5:10 PM UTC

politician wrote: post #47

All sovereign nations reserve the right to regulate foreign goods, vessels, diplomats, currency, and peoples distinctly from their native counterparts. Apps are truly no different.

If this is your legitimately held view (and I agree to some extent with the core idea), at least let's not be naive about it.

Don't think that this was a well-reasoned decision with careful justification about the causes, potential, solutions, and impacts on US economics and society. It was a guy asking "what can we do to create some leverage over this adversary I don't like? (and was just told about yesterday)"

Don't deceive yourself that this is some step in a principled fight. If it were that, we'd have slapped tariffs/embargoes and more on Russia a couple of years ago. We'd be implementing measures against Venezuela, Myanmar, North Korea, a whole host of countries doing similar or worse. I haven't heard a peep about those.

It's not good when government operates on a whim. Don't deceive yourself about what principle (and person) you're getting behind.

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#113

Post by wombatmobile » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 5:10 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #81

wombatmobile wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a different argument to the one you are inferring. Both arguments could benefit from more context. Boxer Rebellion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer_Rebellion Eight-Nation Alliance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-Nation_Alliance

And what context does those articles add, other than what's already presented?

China fought a land war against a coalition of invaders who attempted to subvert its economic, political and religious sovereignty.

China lost, was forced to cede Hong Kong to the British for 99 years, and paid 668,661,220 taels of silver from 1901 to 1939, equivalent in 2010 to $US 61 billion on a purchasing power parity basis.

A large portion of the reparations paid to the United States was diverted to pay for the education of Chinese students in U.S. universities under the Boxer Indemnity Scholarship Program. To prepare the students chosen for this program an institute was established to teach the English language and to serve as a preparatory school. When the first of these students returned to China they undertook the teaching of subsequent students; from this institute was born Tsinghua University.

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#114

Post by srtjstjsj » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 5:11 PM UTC

valuearb wrote: post #44

shiado wrote: post #22

Free speech concerns on an app built by a nation where people have no rights that bans people for bringing up the Tiananmen Square massacre and Uyghur genocide, unreal.

The unreal part is that your don’t understand free speech rights, ie that the users possess them. Are you claiming that ByteDance controlled the tanks used in Tiananmen square massacre or is conducting the Uyghur massacre? If so, the Trump administration screwed up by not presenting that evidence.

The executive order bans the service, not the users. Users can speak freely in any forum that exists

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#115

Post by amelius » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 5:12 PM UTC

aphextron wrote: post #42

From the beginning of this I never understood how there could be any legal basis whatsoever for the ban. Apparently that's because there was none.

If China can block Facebook, Google, etc., then why can't the US block Chinese apps?

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#116

Post by srtjstjsj » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 5:13 PM UTC

lotu wrote: post #19

gist wrote: post #7

> who argued that prohibitions would violate the free-speech rights of millions of Chinese-speaking Americans who rely on it for communication. By the same thinking Comcast should not be able to cut off someone's internet service (for not paying a bill) because doing so would violate that person's free speech rights (the ability to send email). Ditto for hosting providers, registrars and so on. In this case the gover…

Free speech rights protect you from the government not private companies.

The Supreme Court if the United States disagrees with you. Free Speech rights are projected in public forums operated by private entities. Shopping malls are a classic example.

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#117

Post by mike_h » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 5:14 PM UTC

srtjstjsj wrote: post #85

pizza wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You really need to explain your point more thoroughly. - "allow WeChat to gain an even greater foothold on American soil" - does this mean have more users? - "minimize total damage" - it would be good if you articulated the damage being done - "Imagine if Google was as controlled by and as much of a cheerleader for the US government as WeChat is for the Chinese" - according to Julian Assange, https://wikileaks.org/go…

Google employees being fans of the person who lost the Presidential election doesn't make Google a cheerleader for the government.

Google was an active collaborator with the state, on not just intelligence gathering but on soft-power influence-pushing (according to that article).

Maybe they have lost some influence in the current administration (maybe not), but Facebook has by all appearances been eager to take their place.

The US government can’t be seen openly wielding large internet companies for its interests. But any modern state needs to. And so it does it within the paradigm of the West: public denial, private understandings.

The difference between China/Wechat and US/FB/Google is one is out in the open, and the other is covered by a fig leaf.

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#118

Post by seanmcdirmid » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 5:14 PM UTC

politician wrote: post #47

All sovereign nations reserve the right to regulate foreign goods, vessels, diplomats, currency, and peoples distinctly from their native counterparts. Apps are truly no different.

Sovereign nations also have the right to set rules and laws that restrict the actions of their executives. The people who govern America are subject to a lot of laws that restrict their power to channel sovereign rights, and for good reason.

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#119

Post by srtjstjsj » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 5:14 PM UTC

valuearb wrote: post #39

helen___keller wrote: post #2

A preliminary injunction makes perfect sense considering how immediate and widely impactful a ban on WeChat would be to the Chinese-American community. The onus is on the Trump administration to show that the immediate national security risk of letting WeChat continue to operate during legal proceedings exceeds the impact on Chinese Americans. Clearly there was no proof to make this case, because this was hardly abou…

Don’t know why you are being downvoted, this is the most accurate summation of the ban I’ve read yet.

Likely for the speculative accusations in the second half.

Re: Trump’s WeChat curbs halted by judge on free speech concerns

#120

Post by kolanos » Sun, Sep 20, 2020, 5:15 PM UTC

quicklime wrote: post #82

softwaredoug wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's more accurate to say the US had a temporary (1 decade) diversion from the norm of "Benign Neglect"[1] which pissed off Americans to the point they sought explicit Independence. China has a much longer cultural history of being "self contained" (and suspicious of outsiders) which was deeply reinforced in the 19th century Opium Wars, etc. 1 - http://community.weber.edu/weberreads/salutary_or_benign_neg...

Yep. A better analogy would be if the US had lost the revolutionary war, and was subjected to a century or more of British mercantilism, which they were only now starting to recover from.

They were subjected to 170 years of mercantilism prior to the American Revolution. Any American ship that dared trade with any power other than the British Empire was deemed a "pirate" and was fired upon by cannon.