Come on people. This is ridiculous.
If they had the perfect privacy policy, they could simply tell their clients to view a video that you have uploaded for them to see.
Tik Tok is a dumpster fire but his is not interesting.
TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)
281–290 of 342 posts
Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)
#282Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is Trump EO not also a gun to bytedance head? Apple could choose to discontinue cloud services and setup backdoor to physical iDevices access which would have made their products not competitive, but they chose to play ball same way Bytedance did. It's both lawfare coercion. It's functionally the same - subborn domestic data within framework accessible by domestic legislation. As for defending either idea, I think it…
No, because EOs do not hold ultimate power in the US. Bytedance also had the (quite realistic) option to challenge the executive through the US's independent judiciary. Ultimately, they took this option and they were successful, and they maintain ownership of TikTok assets in the US to this day. There aren't any functional counterparts to these checks on power in China that would have been relevant to Apple/GBCD. The…
Is Trump EO not also a gun to bytedance head? Apple could choose to discontinue cloud services and setup backdoor to physical iDevices access which would have made their products not competitive, but they chose to play ball same way Bytedance did. It's both lawfare coercion. It's functionally the same - subborn domestic data within framework accessible by domestic legislation. As for defending either idea, I think it's fine, everyone watches out for their interest including putting guns to heads.
Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)
#283Half the comments here suffer from a bad case of whataboutism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
I though "whataboutism" was when the USSR points out that you're an apartheid state when you criticize them about their economic system, not when your own citizens wonder out loud why you're criticizing another country for doing something that you also do.
Whataboutism is when instead of engaging with the content of the claim, you instead try to deflect by bringing up something else. "TikTok is collecting data? What about Google?"
Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)
#284A 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…
Is this collection different from, say, Meta? I believe they collect all the same information via Instagram. And before someone says Meta is an American company, not controlled by an adversary, let me recall that it’s controlled by Zuckerberg who spent $419 million to influence US election administration in a seemingly partisan way (“democracy hacking” as another commenter said). Meta may not be YOUR adversary, but t…
Even if they are, that would be irrelevant, a "tu quoque fallacy": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)
#285Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's no whataboutism. You make a big fuss about tiktok but meta owned apps are just as bad. The Muslim camps is just a laughable pretext. If the U.S would care so much about poor muslims, especially muslim women around the world they would not have left Afghanistan in such a hurry... As far as I'm concered I would ban all these spyware apps, chinese and american alike. They are pure spyware and bad for our health and…
Ok, let's start with banning tik tok.
Why just tiktok when we can ban them all?
Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)
#286Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like google, twitter, facebook, instagram, apple and more.
At very least Twitter and Apple have a decent track record of declining to provide data without justification. It seems pretty safe to assume the Chinese government wouldn't have to ask at all to get any of this information.
Apple was part of PRISM.
Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)
#287I recall when wifi was first a thing, TV news people would drive around with "hackers" who would "war drive" and find networks, and egads! Connect! Nothing is safe online!
Now this.
Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)
#288Earlier quoted context omitted.
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-...
That’s not an answer though. The parent to your comment is asking what caused CTCL to give more to Democratically aligned counties. Everyone agrees it happened - I am just unconvinced it has a strictly partisan explanation. They are asking for proof it’s malicious. Just stating there is a difference in funding isn’t proof the CTCL acted with partisanship. There are many latent variables besides GOP/Dem, Urban/Rural t…
> And the total amount of the grants was not determined based on population. Rather, amounts tracked with blue votes. The average grant amount per registered voter for a Biden-carried jurisdiction was more than 50 percent larger than the average for those that Trump carried. [1]
>Emails from the Office of the Pennsylvania Governor and the Pennsylvania Department of State show that former Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar and an official in Gov. Tom Wolf’s office knew about private 2020 election grants and invited Democratic-leaning counties to apply, appearing to aid the selective process at a time when other counties were unaware. No email shows any official in either office providing similar information or assistance to any of the commonwealth’s Republican-leaning counties. [2]
It appears that the grant process were overly influenced by politics both from an application, and an outcome perspective.
I'm against privitization of election processes.
[1] https://www.realclearpolicy.com/articles/2022/03/02/show_me_...
[2] https://broadandliberty.com/2021/10/19/former-sec-of-state-b...
Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)
#289India is the only country banned tiktok. Huge respect for the country
Nah, China was the first country to ban Tiktok.
Re: TikTok updated privacy policy to collect faceprints and voiceprints (2021)
#290Earlier quoted context omitted.
> let me recall that it’s controlled by Zuckerberg who spent $419 million to influence US election administration in a seemingly partisan way For more context, from: https://www.protocol.com/newsletters/policy/zuck-bucks-consp... > He offered nearly half a billion dollars in grants to any election official who wanted one, as long as those officials spent it on what a lot of people would consider mundane essentials: b…
"Zuckerberg and Chan tapped prominent Republican election lawyer Michael Toner to review the grants CTCL awarded last year to counties and other jurisdictions across the country.” Toner, a former chairman of the Federal Election Commission, “discovered that more Republican jurisdictions, defined as municipalities that voted for Trump in 2020, applied for and received grants from CTCL" https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/p…
On pure scale alone, surely urban areas have far more voters, and therefore more need for funds than much smaller red counties?