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

TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

pandasecurity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 342 posts

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#231

Post by tablespoon »

omniglottal wrote: post #229
tablespoon wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Or maybe we should just support and adopt open source alternatives... That's a fantasy that makes the perfect into an enemy of the good.

People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

>>> Twitter should bring back Vine so we have a US ran equivalent.

>> Or maybe we should just support and adopt open source alternatives...

> People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

You misunderstood. I'm objecting to the either/or framing that implicitly says that something like Vine should not be brought back. If you want to create an open source alternative, go ahead and I hope you're successful. However, the chances of that succeeding are much smaller, therefore it's not a good choice to focus on to solve the particular problem at hand.

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#232

Post by [deleted] »

sdk16420 wrote: post #210
actuator wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tiktok is a far worse threat to India than Meta though. Unlike China, US is not an adversary of India and US didn't kill Indian soldiers just two years back. So it makes sense they would go after Tiktok. The harm is just not espionage, it is also manipulation of sentiment by propoganda. Also, I am not really sure with all the equivalence to Meta in this thread. Sure, Meta has things to be criticized about but if one…

WhatsApp has led to dozens of brutal deaths in India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_WhatsApp_lynchings

[deleted]

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#233

Post by [deleted] »

jibe wrote: post #205
gzer0 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Voting access expansion and protection should not be considered partisan. End of story.

So if we decided to channel all voter access expansion and protection funds to the Koch Brothers that would be totally fine because it should be considered non-partisan? In the most abstract sense, it isn't partisan. In the actual implementation, it is partisan.

[deleted]

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#234

Post by Krasnol »

upupandup wrote: post #5

A security researcher wrote an article while back and it was shocking to see how much data TikTok was collecting: - biometrics - what words are mentioned in the video, popularity - surrounding wifi, location data - your contacts (presumably to cross link to social media platforms) I just can't believe that a powerful country like America is letting a not-so-friendly military/civilian complex infiltrate it for somewha…

It could become hard to argument since the rest of the US digital industry is collecting the same data. So why prevent it with one while allowing it with others?

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#236

Post by causi »

sdk16420 wrote: post #210
actuator wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tiktok is a far worse threat to India than Meta though. Unlike China, US is not an adversary of India and US didn't kill Indian soldiers just two years back. So it makes sense they would go after Tiktok. The harm is just not espionage, it is also manipulation of sentiment by propoganda. Also, I am not really sure with all the equivalence to Meta in this thread. Sure, Meta has things to be criticized about but if one…

WhatsApp has led to dozens of brutal deaths in India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_WhatsApp_lynchings

That's an absurd claim. The rumors about thieves and child abductors could have just as easily been spread over Telegram or AOL Instant Messenger or SnapChat. The chosen platform is completely immaterial.

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#237

Post by fortuna86 »

lizardactivist wrote: post #230
fortuna86 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Yes but what about the US Government?" is not an actual response to concerns about Tiktok, it's a lazy attempt at deflection and distraction. And the US Government doesn't use private sector data to round up and imprison their citizens in concentration camps. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/12/14/huawei-surve...

I don't answer to concerns about TikTok because I don't think there are any, and so I instead point to the ever-present elephant in the IT security discussion room. And as for the US Government and concentration camp, maybe they don't use private sector data for that, but they sure do it based on ethnicity and origins, such as Japanese Americans in concentration camps during WW2, and South American children and their…

You responded to a question with a demonstration of your politics (ie. who you trust, and who you don't trust). Trusting the Chinese Government when they are in the midst of using technology to enable horrific crimes against humanity is a weird political position to take.

And pointing out anything that has nothing to do with Tiktok in a thread about Tiktok is not providing context, it's an attempt at distraction and deflection away from the thing you trust (the CCP, somehow) towards the thing you don't (the US Gov).

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#238

Post by [deleted] »

irthomasthomas wrote: post #225
solar-ice wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there stories of red counties applying for the money and not getting it? Or perhaps it was only marketed towards Dems? What’s the argument as to what happened here?

From zucks own form 990 IRS filing. CTCL awarded all larger grants – on both an absolute and per capita basis to deeply Democratic urban areas. E.g. https://capitalresearch.org/article/shining-a-light-on-zuck-...

[deleted]

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#239

Post by beej71 »

cronix wrote: post #68
whoisjuan wrote: post #52

It’s incredible that the US allowed TikTok (which is by all measures a chinese spy tool) to become such a dominant social network. India got it right from the beggining by banning TikTok. They saw the immense threat and didn’t hesitate. China, by principle, has always banned all foreign information technology companies. What seemed hostile for us, it’s a reasonable play if you understand the unmeasurable power of mas…

Trump tried to ban it in 2020 out of "national security concerns" similar to Huawei. The ACLU and media painted it as anti free speech and xenophobia and never gave the claims any serious scrutiny. > On July 7, 2020, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that the government was considering banning TikTok.[26] In response, experts[weasel words] suggested that Trump's proposed TikTok ban may threaten free speec…

If we're deciding the government has the ability to shut down social media apps for "national security", I want some seriously beefy protections in there to prevent abuse. That slope is genuinely for-real dangerously slippery, and scares me 100x more than the scary stuff TikTok is doing now.

The ban was right to be challenged--if Trump could legally justify it, let him do that in court. And if he couldn't, there's probably a damned good reason for that.

Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)

#240

Post by generj »

jibe wrote: post #205
gzer0 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Voting access expansion and protection should not be considered partisan. End of story.

So if we decided to channel all voter access expansion and protection funds to the Koch Brothers that would be totally fine because it should be considered non-partisan? In the most abstract sense, it isn't partisan. In the actual implementation, it is partisan.

I wouldn’t want all voter access funds channeled by the Koch brothers, but if they decide to fund non-partisan GOTV efforts, I would applaud it.

Even if they ended up donating more to areas likely to vote their way. More voting is good period. If GOTV funding is spread unevenly then more GOTV funding to neglected areas is the solution.

Post reply on HN