111–116 of 116 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is influencing political processes illegal?
Foreigners cannot donate to political campaigns in the US
US Political campaigns influence as a Service.
We solve the common pain point of foreign actors wanting to influence US politics and having to bootstrap all the data collection themselves.
visit our .io site and try the demo! it's that easy.
Duh. No reasonable adult (in any country) would go on the record to propose that a hostile foreign government should run any part of their internal communication infrastructure. It's well documented that all companies in China are beholden to the political whims of the Chinese Communist Party; when national security is at issue, Chinese companies and the Chinese government are one entity, sadly. I'm squinting skeptic…
Just like last time this came up, what actual law is the executive branch accusing TikTok of breaking? I'm no fan of TikTok nor of the CCP and its asymmetric corporate warfare, but the executive branch must not be allowed to invent its own laws.
Well actually; Delegation of Legislative Power.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>As always, remember that there are several FCC commissioners Do they vote along party lines too? I know at the FTC under obama, anything BCP the GOP would oppose. (It seemed extremely weird since up until that point the people who'd be the most civil had been the libertarians, an awkward alliance since the millenials have all known since middle school that money is just pieces of paper.) It's a shame the French or w…
It can be. The Obama and Trump administrations definitely installed captive individuals. Appointment can, and probably should be, taken away. We don't need an FCC that flies by the whims of an administration. There's a lot of agencies that statement applies to though. The downside of such a take is that agencies are inherently derivative of the powers Congress gives them, so offering the president appointments is rea…
Just like last time this came up, what actual law is the executive branch accusing TikTok of breaking? I'm no fan of TikTok nor of the CCP and its asymmetric corporate warfare, but the executive branch must not be allowed to invent its own laws.
The executive branch is responsible for foreign policy and national security. This issue is about a hostile foreign government being in a position to manipulate the internal communications and political debate in the US. So it's more in the realm of foreign policy and national security rather than US corporate law. (Surprising to see this comment downvoted - why?)
That doesn't mean they can or should have power to ban any company, communication or program just because of a vague and weak phrase of national security.
By similar logic they should be able to just lock up foreign citizens because they might be doing something nefarious for their states. No --- this is what rights are for, and the rule of law still applies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
so we good with their GDP growing from using our markets? while they have concentration camps? why are we propping them up if your about freedom?
Sure if you want to go down this route, I don't see why you're singling out TikTok. Do you feel we should stop trading entirely with their country then? I doubt allowing TikTok makes any kind of dent to their GDP versus our other economic entanglements with them. To me it feels like your argument for banning TikTok is because they ban our applications, and so we should do the same kinds of things they do. My argument…