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

631–640 of 677 posts

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

#631

Post by vin047 »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #546
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-bas…

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

You’re misreading that line. It’s: “This explains why TikTok succeeds, and why it is an app the United States ought to be concerned about. ”. The author subsequently explains why.

You mention that you get Fact A and Fact B. Fact C isn’t, “Therefore, TikTok should be banned”. Fact C, according to that post, is that China has begun ideological warfare. For supporters of a ban, Fact D then, is “The US should respond with defensive manoeuvres”. A ban is a defensive move. Nobody’s advocating for an offensive counter-attack (by running misinformation campaigns on their own social media platforms for instance). It’s perfectly reasonable to defend when under attack from a foreign entity.

Whether you think the US is under attack is the real question. But you said you agree with Fact B, so you agree that the possibility for China to use TikTok as a tool for ideological warfare is definitely there. The authors argument is that, combined with the evidence we’ve seen so far (censorship on domestic platforms, censorship on foreign platforms), maybe the US should be taking China’s own words on the matter more seriously.

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

#632

Post by marcosdumay »

mistermann wrote: post #614
marcosdumay wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guess is there are two different factors at play. - Marketing and propaganda cloud everything they touch, and that one market is full of both. We can't even be certain of the public features of those platforms, because there are a bunch of incoherent messages controlling the communication channels. - Most of the features of those products are not public. They impact your life, but you have no chance of even knowin…

Agreed, there's a lot of hidden complexity, but I'm talking about this phenomenon where people seem to lose access to the ability to properly identify things that are clearly visible. For example, higher in the thread someone seems unable to see a distinction between TikTok and Twitter, and even http://english.www.gov.cn . They indeed have many similar attributes, but this similarity seems to then be presumed to exte…

I read that post as asking exactly what distinction creates a problem, not a denial that there are many of them.

Clearly establishing the problem is key on determining how it can be solved. e.g. The solution for foreign editorial influence will only make discourse control more concentrated, and the other way around.

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

#633

Post by causality0 »

dvdkon wrote: post #331
causality0 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read the replies from Chinese nationals on HN defending TikTok. Even they don't pretend you can say anything you want there. Their argument is "How much time would you really spend discussing Tiananmen or criticizing the CCP? Is it really worth losing contact with your friends or colleagues who use TikTok and WeChat?" In my opinion, absolutely. Stop it now before it gets too powerful to ban. WeChat already has 19 mil…

Maybe if freedom of speech on social media platforms is an issue (it is, in my opinion), there should be laws regulating it that would apply to any businesses operating in the US, not just ad-hoc executive orders of dubious objectiveness.

Personally I believe there should be a public alternative to most private internet services. An internet post office whose only rules are the laws of the United States. It's not going to happen, though. Google is too powerful.

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

#634

Post by causality0 »

yorwba wrote: post #389
causality0 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read the replies from Chinese nationals on HN defending TikTok. Even they don't pretend you can say anything you want there. Their argument is "How much time would you really spend discussing Tiananmen or criticizing the CCP? Is it really worth losing contact with your friends or colleagues who use TikTok and WeChat?" In my opinion, absolutely. Stop it now before it gets too powerful to ban. WeChat already has 19 mil…

As someone who has actually talked about the Tiananmen Square protests on WeChat and occasionally corrects misconceptions about how difficult that is, I don't think banning the app will help in any way, since the ban will just reduce the volume of such messages even more. The status quo is that you only need some minor skill at language games to talk about forbidden topics without using any keywords that trigger cens…

since the ban will just reduce the volume of such messages even more.

Trying to "win the hearts and minds" of the Chinese people is a lost cause. Either they agree with the CCP or they've adapted to its restrictions. All we can do is try to keep that ideology from spreading beyond their borders.

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

#635

Post by Aperocky »

vin047 wrote: post #628
Aperocky wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK so we should ban something if it gets popular, but it doesn't matter if it's worse but it's not popular. By extension should we ignore someone who's selling 1 gram of heroin at a time but we should definitely put a guy transporting 1 ton of industrial hemp in prison, on the ground that hemp can be turned into pot, somehow.

You’re comparing Apples to Oranges, or in your case, heroin to hemp; no ones banning the components that make up TikTok (the code, the business, the algorithms etc)... Comparing heroin to heroin though, yes we do ignore someone who’s selling 1 gram of heroin at a time over someone selling 1 ton of heroin at a time.

So is tiktok full of literal official Chinese propaganda? Or is it full of people doing stupid things? Or is people doing stupid things Chinese propaganda nowadays?

You're saying it's comparing heroin to heroin, is it?

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

#636

Post by mistermann »

marcosdumay wrote: post #632
mistermann wrote: post #614

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, there's a lot of hidden complexity, but I'm talking about this phenomenon where people seem to lose access to the ability to properly identify things that are clearly visible. For example, higher in the thread someone seems unable to see a distinction between TikTok and Twitter, and even http://english.www.gov.cn . They indeed have many similar attributes, but this similarity seems to then be presumed to exte…

I read that post as asking exactly what distinction creates a problem, not a denial that there are many of them. Clearly establishing the problem is key on determining how it can be solved. e.g. The solution for foreign editorial influence will only make discourse control more concentrated, and the other way around.

> I read that post as asking exactly what distinction creates a problem, not a denial that there are many of them.

That question was being asked in a roundabout way, but if you're not so generous, do you not pick up a bit of a whiff of incredulity?

>> 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.

"But somehow, a platform that does both must not be allowed to exist?" seems either disingenuous, or that the person is unable to realize that an application that has ~100M users (and significant usage/day), most in a young impressionable demographic, that consists of ~60 second viral videos, just might have distinct and noteworthy differences from a national security point than Twitter, or http://english.www.gov.cn.

To be clear: the onus is not on this person to disprove their counterpart's assertion, far from it. I am referring to the apparent inability to notice that a valid difference might exist, and all of this in a world where we've been constantly told by the media that Russian hackers have been undermining our democracy, and occurring on HN, a site frequented by some of the brightest minds on the planet when it comes to software.

And this is just one example. Reading through the rest of the discussions in this thread, is there not something that seems "a little off" in the way people describe reality? Are so many people simultaneously faking that they are literally unable to see any valid concerns here, or in the arguments put forth in their counterpart in each discussion (and this goes both ways), or are they literally unable to see?

If this was to happen in every thread on HN, one might just write it off to "people being people", but it doesn't happen in every thread, it only seems to happen in certain types of threads. Is this a coincidence? Am I seeing things? Or might something interesting actually be going on here? Is this odd behavior restricted only to HN, or do we see similar behavior elsewhere?

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

#637

Post by jariel »

chrischen wrote: post #621
jariel wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have missed both points entirely. You're assuming that there are 'free market' conditions here (i.e. competition) - there are not. Not even close. 'Free market' ideals such as 'competition and innovation' are not the issues here, because a) there is no 'free market' and b) we're talking about mass media, which is really not about 'innovation'. #1 is a very legitimate issue. To control the mass media, is to contro…

> #1 is a very legitimate issue. To control the mass media, is to control a nation, this is not a 'new world order' concept, it's as old as time. And trying to control what media platforms are allowable... You sound like a communist Chinese official here.

Totally upside down.

Disallowing platforms that are controlled by totalitarian regimes like the CCP would be the rational result of any reasonable data protection policy like a 'slightly better GDPR' for example.

Protecting people's interests and basic national interests is not what the CCP is doing.

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

#638

Post by thesz »

danShumway wrote: post #619
thesz wrote: post #616

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to note that your last question equalizes single 60 second video and fake news post. You are discarding effects of repeated viewing of different algorithmically selected videos on the views of viewers. It is an experiment that is being done right now by no less than TikTok itself. Actually, my beef with the Facebook is exactly the same - one does not control the feed, the feed is being controlled by Face…

> You are discarding effects of repeated viewing of different algorithmically selected videos on the views of viewers. It is an experiment that is being done right now by no less than TikTok itself. And is there any accepted scientific evidence, at all, that this would change whether we should be more worried about priming effects in a TikTok video than fake news posts directly shared by friends and family? > Actuall…

You keep asking for scientific evidence of effects of completely new phenomena. I cannot provide you that. On the other hand, I am pretty sure you cannot provide me with evidence of absence of effects of the experiment of that magnitude.

Facebook is also doing priming, by controlling what user sees. Heck, even television and radio back in the day were used for priming, albeit not in such a direct feedback way.

About "intrusion into the free market".

I see "free market" as a neutral or even negative thing. I do not see "intrusion into the free market" as necessarily negative thing.

I see ban of TikTok as somewhat positive thing given my view on situation. I really want to see regulatory actions on Facebook too.

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

#639

Post by LeifCarrotson »

vin047 wrote: post #631
LeifCarrotson wrote: post #546

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-bas…

> I think that’s a jump to conclusions that is illogical it does not follow from the priors. You’re misreading that line. It’s: “This explains why TikTok succeeds, and why it is an app the United States ought to be concerned about. ”. The author subsequently explains why. You mention that you get Fact A and Fact B. Fact C isn’t, “Therefore, TikTok should be banned”. Fact C, according to that post, is that China has b…

Ah, I think I'm starting to understand. Ideological warfare, IMO, is not real war and should be countered by facts and public education, not by declaring a War on Memes and defense with censorship.

If a platform is afraid that an adult might see a particular piece of information or a particular idea, and be radicalized by it, they've not adjusted to the Information Age. We might need a better way to authenticate trustworthy sources, but I don't think the attack from Tiktok is a sharing of authoritative facts, it's at worst a message that the Chinese government is less evil than the US would like to represent them.

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

#640

Post by marcosdumay »

mistermann wrote: post #636
marcosdumay wrote: post #632

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read that post as asking exactly what distinction creates a problem, not a denial that there are many of them. Clearly establishing the problem is key on determining how it can be solved. e.g. The solution for foreign editorial influence will only make discourse control more concentrated, and the other way around.

> I read that post as asking exactly what distinction creates a problem, not a denial that there are many of them. That question was being asked in a roundabout way, but if you're not so generous, do you not pick up a bit of a whiff of incredulity? >> 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…

On the context of the post he was replying to, yes, I agree. If it's taken as a simple answer, that question sounds completely disingenuous. But I also find it hard to read the comment as a literal answer to the parent.

But anyway, the reason people are uneasy all over the thread is quite simple. Banning a platform this way is a serious interference on the freedoms of expression and initiative, but letting the platform unchecked is a serious offense to the US sovereignty. There are no good options among the ones presented to the people, and the real non-damaging options depend on coordinating a system that is so complex that nobody is certain that they can.

By the way, just for completeness, that's how people around the world feel about Facebook too.

Post reply on HN