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

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

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 401 posts

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

#251

Post by TaylorAlexander »

annexrichmond wrote: post #142
yeahrightok wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The difference between TikTok and WeChat and FB/Google/Twitter is obvious: the former are to some degree controlled by China and the latter are private entities." I think that difference is not that wide as people believe. Throwing money into advertising on any platform will get you close or beyond ideological subversion or active measures. All you have to do is look at the radicalization and the polarization of lef…

I agree, these are problems. But at least in the US we can continue to pass legislation as we learn more about how to properly regulate these platforms It is much easier to enforce laws on a US-based company than a foreign one.

How will passing laws help us when our own government is breaking privacy laws for their mass surveillance programs?

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

#252

Post by controversy »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #249
controversy wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You called me a bigot. I can’t respond. I’m stuck. Nowhere to go. Native Americans can invest in themselves. When they take the patrimony of the Federal government, they don’t. https://youtu.be/pQ4lnDy2xnQ The same is true of the blacks. Before LBJ decimated them, they were on their way to be independent. They were starting to make money equal to whites. They were establishing their own cities with arts like Harlem.…

Wow. At least you're saying the quiet parts loud and clear now.

You should read my profile. Thank you.

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

#253

Post by bscphil »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #127
neither_color wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can do what all expats in China already need to do to access facebook, google, gmail, instagram, twitter, whatsapp, etc: use a vpn.

Just to be clear, the USA doesn’t have the infrastructure or legal framework in place to actually block internet traffic. The best they can do is remove DNS entries.

They could block WeChat from app stores, which would basically be fatal. Especially for iPhone users, who don't even have the option to sideload without jailbreaking.

This is an interesting argument against walled gardens I don't often see: that it gives your government an easy chokepoint to prevent users from using software it doesn't like.

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

#254

Post by Zak »

wvenable wrote: post #205
linkjuice4all wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if you get to have it both ways without trampling on WeChat's first amendment rights as well as those of their users unless you pass data privacy laws for US citizens/persons (which might have first amendment implications anyway) and deal with WeChat through whatever mechanisms this newly-passed (and yet-to-be created) privacy law contains. So either WeChat, Facebook, and whoever can facilitate protected…

> trampling on WeChat's first amendment rights As a non-American, my question is why does WeChat have first amendment rights? It's not an American company.

The bill of rights treats rights as existing in morality (whether based on natural law philosophy or religion) prior to and outside of written law. It does not purport to grant rights, but to prohibit the government from violating them.

In that framework, the US government is not to violate anyone's freedom of speech anywhere in the world. That doesn't seem to be what's at issue in this case though; the case was brought by a group of US-based WeChat users on grounds that the ban would restrict their freedom to communicate with people in China who are unable to use other communication services.

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

#255

Post by coliveira »

annexrichmond wrote: post #156
Dahoon wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The difference between TikTok and WeChat and FB/Google/Twitter is obvious: the former are to some degree controlled by China and the latter are private entities. How is for example Facebook better because it isn't somehow tied in to the US government? On the one hand the state still have access to all the data from Facebook it wants (NSA, warrants) but on the other they have a hard time protecting its users privacy…

Yeah these are real problems, I agree. And US citizens should continue to put pressure on their politicians to pass more privacy-related legislation But my point wasn't really about data collection, it was about influence and content-control. People are readily influenced by memes, ads, headlines, etc which is why such platforms are so problematic because people are not comfortable with how much influence they have a…

You shouldn't think that the US laws will save the day, just remember the debacle of 2016 election, where multiple foreign organizations had access to millions of voters with the tacit consent of FB. Since then FB hasn't done anything to properly address this problem.

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

#256

Post by seanmcdirmid »

bscphil wrote: post #253
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to be clear, the USA doesn’t have the infrastructure or legal framework in place to actually block internet traffic. The best they can do is remove DNS entries.

They could block WeChat from app stores, which would basically be fatal. Especially for iPhone users, who don't even have the option to sideload without jailbreaking. This is an interesting argument against walled gardens I don't often see: that it gives your government an easy chokepoint to prevent users from using software it doesn't like.

Facebook is not listed on the Chinese App Store, but you can install it easily by switching your region to the USA, installing Facebook, and then switching your region back to China, without losing apps from either region. (I know this because I owned an iPhone while living in China)

Much easier than having to bother with a VPN, and many Chinese people are already used to jumping through such hoops.

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

#257

Post by zo1 »

augustt wrote: post #198
controversy wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please. At this point, both blacks and Indians are able to take various Federal and State monies to be the best they can be. The Indians have relative sovereignty. They could take their federal and casino monies and plow them into an R&D bonanza. Blacks in the US have a golden ticket to pretty much any institution they wish to attend. Both have had trillions of US dollars plowed into their communities over the year v…

Yeah honestly what more could these people want - it's not like people are calling them Indians to this day or suggesting they can't think freely enough to "escape" the Democratic "plantation". Read some books not written by Candace Owens you tool.

I don't think it's constructive at all to just call someone a "tool" and suggest it's because they only consume a certain kind of literature.

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

#258

Post by seanmcdirmid »

hurrdurr2 wrote: post #247
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to be clear, the USA doesn’t have the infrastructure or legal framework in place to actually block internet traffic. The best they can do is remove DNS entries.

I've read somewhere that they can force the ISPs to ban wechat traffic? I'm not in IT so is this just complete hogwash?

They really can’t. They would need some kind of firewall to do it, and ISPs simply aren’t setup for that. They can’t even ban child porn sites effectively (instead the police must rely on catching viewers of such and shutting down sites physically if possible).

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

#259

Post by coliveira »

Banning an app is the typical move of an authoritarian regime. A democratic regime would first create laws to regulate Tiktok as well as domestic social networks. Of course, the authoritarian tactic is defended by American companies for two reasons: killing outside competition (in the name of patriotism) and at the same time avoiding the necessary regulation.

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

#260

Post by seanmcdirmid »

coliveira wrote: post #259

Banning an app is the typical move of an authoritarian regime. A democratic regime would first create laws to regulate Tiktok as well as domestic social networks. Of course, the authoritarian tactic is defended by American companies for two reasons: killing outside competition (in the name of patriotism) and at the same time avoiding the necessary regulation.

American companies aren’t supportive of this. Also, the USA doesn’t give the president unchecked power, which is why this injunction simply shuts the ban down until the government can prove in court that it is legal. An authoritarian regime would have no concept of independent judicial review.
Post reply on HN