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

Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 677 posts

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#541

Post by whatshisface »

thursday0987 wrote: post #539
whatshisface wrote: post #531

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some TikTok users are in the US, and taking a service away from them should happen under US law.

thats not how tariffs work, thats not how international trade works, and it has never worked that way. there is no right to any goods or services provided by a foreign entity. none. prove me wrong by providing a link to a law, treaty, or other official rule that says otherwise. i'll wait.

Let's just think practically about what could happen. Suppose the chief executive has a grudge against an individual person. He or she bans them from owning anything produced overseas. Legal or not, I think we can agree that shouldn't be possible.

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#542

Post by [deleted] »

Dig1t wrote: post #281
p1necone wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not a company. It's a division of a foreign government. Can you elaborate on this? As far as I can tell this is just not the case, and none of the people saying it are clarifying what they mean.

If you examine ByteDance's structure technically, you are correct that it does look like just a regular company. But just about everything runs differently in China. All major companies in China have CCP party members on their boards who not only influence corporate policy, but are actually _deferred to_ on anything remotely political.[2][3] At the end of the day the party has the final say in any matters that it car…

[deleted]

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#543

Post by 082349872349872 »

jl2718 wrote: post #475
Hokusai wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Instead, I believe that it is a national security issue That or the president wants a Friendly social network to manage the news cycle of the election instead of a social network that is not so much influenced by him. Those who control the news has the power to change perceptions.

Okay, so where do you get your information?

My recommendations for those with cycles to spare: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24614732

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#544

Post by sudosysgen »

warbaker wrote: post #186
sudosysgen wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there actually real limits on government in the US? If the Democrats and Republicans agreed that they wanted to do something, would anything stop them? The US government is already unconstitutionally doing what you say that judicial review prevents, and the partisan (by design) Supreme Court simply refuses to take the case. So much for judicial review. There is no check for power, only balances of power. And powe…

Are you seriously equating the two govts? Consider that, because hackernews/YC is a US company, your post is read by everyone who cares to see it. Consider what would happen if you decried the powers of the CCP on a China-based platform. Consider what would happen to you, personally, if you did so while living in China.

How does that have anything to do with my point that if the Democrats and Republicans agree on something unconstitutional it will happen anyways?

Both that can be true and it can also be true that the Chinese government is worse to their own citizens.

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#545

Post by room500 »

mantap wrote: post #265
dilap wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's fair. Imagine, for example, an extremely convincing book is authored that convinces anyone that reads it that the United States government should disolve itself and its citizens should pledge fealty to China. Quite credibly, the book could be described a national security threat to the US. However, I would still argue that the book should not be banned, and that any country that wants to honestly describe itse…

I don't think a social network is like a book. It's more like the postal system. TikTok is not saying anything themselves. They are transmitting communications that other people are saying to each other (in the form of short videos).

Their algorithm is their speech.

If users had to address their videos to each other and they were delivered FIFO without priority, I would agree that they would be neutral.

But TikTok (and all social networks) are using algorithms to promote some content and demote others. This algorithm is an extremely powerful voice.

In 2016-2018, everyone was concerned about foreign countries influencing the election by running bots/ads on Facebook. Following the election, there were many policies put into place to try to prevent this bad behavior [1]. Fast forward to 2020 and there is documented proof of a foreign country controlling a social media algorithm and we aren't concerned?

[1] https://about.fb.com/news/2018/12/inside-feed-coordinated-in...

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#546

Post by LeifCarrotson »

localhost wrote: post #20

Unlike some other commenters below, I don't believe that this is a privacy issue. Instead, I believe that it is a national security issue because TikTok is controllable by the CCP which is ideologically opposed to the United States. The next global conflict will likely be one between the east and the west, with control of information being advantageous to both sides in the conflict. China already blocks the western I…

In that post, Ben writes:

> It feels like we're talking past each other.

I completely agree! I do feel like you and I and Ben (even after reading Ben's post) are still talking past each other. I am completely lost at the point where you say "A and B, therefore C, the US should ban TikTok." What is it about the combination of success and external control that means TikTok should be banned? Ben wrote:

> This [video-based content-rich algorithmically-controlled feed] both explains why TikTok succeeds, and why it is an app the United States ought to be concerned about.

I think that's a jump to conclusions that is illogical it does not follow from the priors.

You, Ben, and other advocates of a ban on TikTok try really hard to explain and prove Fact A, that TikTok is a uniquely successful mobile-first semi-social network/information sharing platform. You also describe Fact B, that ByteDance is vulnerable to CCP influence which is ideologically opposed to the US. You do well on both counts, I agree completely with these facts, they're pretty indisputable. I would probably use "different from" instead of "opposed" to frame the philosophical differences in a less antagonistic way, but still, I'm with you on these facts.

http://english.www.gov.cn/ is another platform that's controlled exclusively by the Chinese government. But no one's proposing a book-burning, that the US firewall all information controlled by the CCP or those with ideological differences. Twitter is a popular information-sharing social platform, and there are Chinese actors on it, but this argument isn't extended to suggest that it be banned, either. But somehow, a platform that does both must not be allowed to exist? I don't get it.

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#547

Post by colejohnson66 »

dahfizz wrote: post #510
publicola1990 wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also TikTok hasn't violated US laws, then where is the case for banning them? Banning something that is perfectly legal seems absurd to do in our legal system. Also US government hasn't made a specific claim of any imminent security threat posed by TikTok. From a data security point of view the expert opinion seems to be that there isn't a clear cut case for singling out and banning tiktok. The ban is therefore undou…

> Also TikTok hasn't violated US laws, then where is the case for banning them? Banning something that is perfectly legal seems absurd to do in our legal system. Cuban cigars haven't broken any laws. Iranian ceramics haven't broken any laws. The power to sanction / embargo is a very well established power of the government, and it doesn't require a trial. China has long been in violation of the Trafficking in Persons…

Your argument boils down to: they can be banned, so because “national security,” it’s ok. China may be violating laws, but TikTok isn’t, so singling them out is a bill of attainder, which the Constitution explicitly prohibits.[a] If they’re violating any laws, then why aren’t we being told anything but national security?

[a] And before the “ByteDance isn’t American, so the Constitution doesn’t apply” argument, they actually do employ US citizens in a US office. There’s also the fact that the Constitution doesn’t differentiate between citizens and non-citizens, but that seems to be ignored nowadays.

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#548

Post by 082349872349872 »

dfischer wrote: post #411
082349872349872 wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

thoughts on sorting oneself out, albeit with difficulty: seek variety of manipulated information: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24600424 systematically analyse received information: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23897577 analyse especially source levels: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24459177 compare https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24403135 and remember we may have evolved big energy-guzzlin…

Thank you for contributing something thoughtful and relevant among the disheartening engagements.

You're welcome. In connection with Bezmenov you may find the setting of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventeen_Moments_of_Spring#Ba... interesting.

The Arthashastra recommends never acting on intelligence which hasn't been confirmed through at least three independent channels. Russian, swiss, and US secondary sources agree on the the underlying events of that scenario. I guess if the soviets really had had a highly-placed mole like Stierlitz, they could have done more, perhaps have been subtly encouraging top nazis first to prioritise ideology over pragmatism and then to get into speed, into the occult, and into the bunker.

However, I think a simpler explanation for the later events of 1945 would be: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23401308

====

Nighttime, 1944 Berlin: A ushanka-wearing man with skis and a parachute creeps silently along the hallway of an apartment building. He raps quickly on one of the doors.

A dishelved german in nightcap and house shoes opens after a few minutes.

"The eagles fly over the campfire. Repeat: the eagles fly over the campfire!" whispers the man in the hallway.

"Sorry," says the german, "I'm Otto Stierlitz the plumber, born 1904. You want Otto von Stierlitz the spy, born 1899. He lives up on the third floor."

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#549

Post by mechnesium »

sbmthakur wrote: post #527
mechnesium wrote: post #474

Welcome to the Red Scare 2.0, comrade. TikTok is under fire because it’s a piece of software from China. We’ve turned a blind eye to hardware security and the fact that the iPhone and nearly every other mainstream consumer device is manufactured in China and likely contain backdoors far more sinister than userland applications can muster. We can not and should not have such double standards when it comes to foreign p…

Western governments can be changed through elections. Is the same true for the Chinese government?

I think it is just an illusion that Western governments can be changed. In reality, the deep state is an unstoppable machine underneath the facade of democracy.

See perception management: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perception_management

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#550

Post by SifJar »

sanp wrote: post #453
SifJar wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook allows anyone to purchase targeted messaging, but it's an American run company which likely makes the difference - there is likely a perception (real or imagined) that FB will be willing & able to combat "enemy" messaging. In regards to the value of 60 second funny videos to share messaging, part of the strength here may be exactly because it's a platform for short, funny videos; as long as the ideas being c…

Then, shouldn't videos on Facebook be banned as well?

Why just videos? Images and text posts could be used in the same way, to disguise messaging/propaganda as a joke etc.

FWIW I don't think Facebook is likely any better in this area than TikTok, or indeed any social network or platform based around user generated content. It's likely always possible to create popular content that subconsciously influences people's thinking.

One thing that might separate Facebook from TikTok (for some people, not necessarily myself) is the question of "do I trust who is serving this content?" - in these days of algorithmically generated feeds, these companies can likely get away with more in terms of inserting specifically targeted content etc. without it looking suspicious, and have people assume it's showing because it's organically popular.

Post reply on HN