Live data from Hacker News

The FBI alleges TikTok poses national security concerns

npr.org

101–110 of 430 posts

Re: The FBI alleges TikTok poses national security concerns

#101
post #20

The very fact that not a single western social network is permitted to operate in China is a sufficient reason to ban TikTok in America.

That argument makes no sense, because we do not want to mirror other countries. Instead, there are substantial arguments about freedom of speech and accountability. Even though they are messy, they are what we need to apply here because they are a legally binding framework that we built over decades. By the way, I found Levitski and Ziblatt's book "How Democracies Die" [1] a pretty good treatment of these issues of b…

I would make it as a free trade argument.

Trade is a 2 way street, if our companies can not compete there, then their companies should not be able to compete here.

Re: The FBI alleges TikTok poses national security concerns

#102

I can't imagine their reaction when they discover that so many IP cameras/NVR/DVR have been and still are being used as surveillance devices, and in some cases they have been hacked to either phone home (China?) video feeds, or as botnet hosts. https://hacked.camera/ http://www.insecam.org/en/

Or when they discover most of the technology equipment and chips they buy are made in China, including common networking equipment like routers that require cloud login to manage.

Re: The FBI alleges TikTok poses national security concerns

#103
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surveillance isn't the primary issue. INFLUENCE OPERATIONS is. China's ability to direct content to achieve their strategic goals, and to do so at a very granular level, is too great a risk. Its not the only property with this capability (cough, 4chan/pol/, cough), but its by far the largest.

Aren't influence operations free speech? (thread locked after 1,397,957 comments)

Yes. So is yelling 'fire' in a crowded theatre. Nothing is without limits, and with out limits we are nothing.

Re: The FBI alleges TikTok poses national security concerns

#104
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should have rules that include forbidding any Chinese company from selling SaaS or social media until CCP takes the Great Firewall down. They've made a pariah internet and they should stay there. Suit you? Suits me.

What about Russian social media (I think vk got sanctioned but not livejournal)? What about, given the other thread, Qatar? Should Orkut (Brazilian) have been allowed? My point is that the rules should target what it does rather than simply "China=Bad", since that offers a way back into compliance with the rules. However unlikely that actually is.

> Brazilian

Nobody is calling for blanket bans of foreign apps. This is a straw man argument.

Re: The FBI alleges TikTok poses national security concerns

#105
post #82
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sigh can we not have targeted-by-nationality bans and instead have .. rules? If Tiktok the app is performing surveillance, ban surveillance by apps . All of them. Or make it technically impossible to escape its little sandbox, and let people have their entertainment.

We can't have rules that aren't governed by nationality, because the US basically only sees nationality. TikTok is called "an issue" not because of what it does, why it does it or how it does it. It is called that because of who is doing it. As such, we can expect all this racism couched in careful political language to continue and keep continuing.

This is rather specifically not racism. You are allowed to have opinions about a country that has to do with it's government and the way it operates, without being racist. How do you or anyone else benefit from trying to connect this to racism?

Re: The FBI alleges TikTok poses national security concerns

#106
A recent tiktok trend hitting my city and others seems to be calling in/airdropping/swatting/posting active shooter threats at local schools. So far, this has shut down my kid's school several times this year.

TikTok gets to be the vector for this new scale of virality, America loses future economic competitiveness. Who is the winner in this scenario?

https://www.spieltimes.com/news/what-is-tiktoks-active-shoot... https://www.thedailybeast.com/tiktok-shooting-challenge-seen... https://wpde.com/news/local/rcsd-at-blythewood-high-school-a...

Re: The FBI alleges TikTok poses national security concerns

#107
post #5

Besides the obvious concerns about tracking/spying, TikTok has great potential as a propaganda tool to gain subtle influence over America's youth. For example, its algorithm could be tweaked to elevate content that is favourable to the Chinese Communist Party.

I wonder why when China does this it’s always a bad thing. Isn’t the inverse also true i.e. western media influencing and nudging narratives, except that we can actually observe this happening right now. Where do you stand in that case?

I mean, yes, but there’s no communist bogeyman to blame, just our own vanities.

Re: The FBI alleges TikTok poses national security concerns

#108
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is a surveillance pseudo-democracy. The problem here being this time they can't insert themselves into the surveillance pipeline. They're not better or worse (unless you're fine with your own Govt surveilling you but not another state), just not the status quo.

Surveillance isn't the primary issue. INFLUENCE OPERATIONS is. China's ability to direct content to achieve their strategic goals, and to do so at a very granular level, is too great a risk. Its not the only property with this capability (cough, 4chan/pol/, cough), but its by far the largest.

> China's

Tiktok is not China, Tiktok is owned by a private company

All the arguments that you are using can be successful leveraged against any Inqtel funded private company (of which there are plenty), so I'd recommend you to speak in a measured way

Re: The FBI alleges TikTok poses national security concerns

#110
post #25
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure that US really wants to set a precedent of protectionism when so many large US technology companies operate globally.

The U.S. has a long, proud history of protectionism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93United_States_tr...

I would say a bit more about my position rather than just make the claim that the US has a long and proud(?) history of protectionism. The US had and still has protectionist policies. Interestingly, the trade war was not so much protectionist as anti-China. The difference being that the US would rather buy from somewhere else, and if from China then it will be taxed. But protectionism means to protect a countries businesses. There were of course protectionist elements but in my opinion that was not the focus. A famous example of US protectionism was the Japan situation in the 1980s where Reagan forced Japan to limit their output to the US market.

Speaking of Japan, it, from 1930 until about 1970, was a great example of protectionism. No foreign companies were allowed to operate in Japan until 1960, and even then it was only in uninmportant low-margin industries. Imports were completely controlled by the Japanese government, which imported _everything_ based on what they thought was needed: automobiles are something that were almost never imported, for example. China today is less protectionist than Japan at it's peak but still many factors more protectionist than the US. For example, one cannot directly open a foreign business in China. They must work with a domestic company that takes half their profits.

All this isn't to say that the US isn't protectionist, or that protectionism is even bad. But your claim that "The U.S. has a long, proud history of protectionism" really has no qualifying element, and in fact all the qualifiers seem to go in the opposite direct that they should.

Post reply on HN