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

Bipartisan Legislation to Ban TikTok

rubio.senate.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 445 posts

Re: Bipartisan Legislation to Ban TikTok

#391

Post by blsapologist42 »

RobotToaster wrote: post #212
philjohn wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US Tech firms products are largely banned in China, closing off a market of 1bn+ - why should Chinese firms have unfettered access to the US?

They were mostly banned because they refused to follow Chinese law, what US law has TikTok refused to follow? Apple for instance follows Chinese law, and does a lot of business there. America loves to talk about the "rule of law", but will just ban anything that competes with it's MIC controlled platforms.

What other platforms has the US banned exactly?

Apple is not a social media company so it's not a good comparison.

Re: Bipartisan Legislation to Ban TikTok

#392

Post by blsapologist42 »

finikytou wrote: post #33
philjohn wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US Tech firms products are largely banned in China, closing off a market of 1bn+ - why should Chinese firms have unfettered access to the US?

it makes sense. I always thought the US were the closest country to china in terms of censorship and lack of human rights

TikTok is suddenly a human right now? Someone better tell the UN.

Re: Bipartisan Legislation to Ban TikTok

#393

Post by blsapologist42 »

noahtallen wrote: post #107
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not both? It's harder to write, agree on, and pass the regulation that you suggest.

It is hard to imagine this ever passing given how popular TikTok is in the US. Certainly strong privacy regulations are more popular among the people than banning apps.

The vast majority of users are in the <25 demographic, which means they basically don't vote. Also only a minority of Americans even use TikTok. It could easily be more popular to ban it (I have no data though).

Re: Bipartisan Legislation to Ban TikTok

#394

Post by blsapologist42 »

1attice wrote: post #290
jonathankoren wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Data storage regulations are boring poindexter. We need lines like, “TikTok is digital fentanyl.”

Language like this exaggerates individual-user harms of TikTok by comparison to lethal street drug, conflating them with public, national-interest harms. This is disingenous, as reported by common-sense. For example, my city does not have sidewalks lined with tents full of TikTok users, but the same cannot be said of the comparand. This has either or both of the following knock-on effects: - Undermine trust in the sp…

It could certainly be true that a modest harm to 80 million people is comparable to a serious harm to a smaller number. Of course fentanyl is pretty clearly a more serious issue but I think it's plausible they are in the same ballpark.

Re: Bipartisan Legislation to Ban TikTok

#395

Post by blsapologist42 »

dtjb wrote: post #189
elmomle wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and the CCP has banned Instagram and Facebook because they understand that those are ultimately tools for subtly shaping mass opinion, regardless of whether it's clear that they're used for that purpose. Why would the US not do the same with TikTok?

> Why would the US not do the same with TikTok? Millions (?) of Americans have freely chosen to receive and interact with the app, wouldn't their freedom of speech allow them to enjoy the content they choose?

Freedom of speech doesn't mean consuming content. Indeed there appears to be no such right in the constitution. The only protections would be for the publisher of the content, so I suppose Bytedance could challenge this law on free speech grounds.

Re: Bipartisan Legislation to Ban TikTok

#396

Post by blsapologist42 »

cute_boi wrote: post #345

"national security concerns" and "what about children" have always been used by government to pass useless bills. Instead of banning Tiktok, how about enforcing proper rules and regulations that every social media should follow? Why not make a proper privacy that every people in US deserves. Many people are probably glad that they are banning Chinese tech, but at the end it is gonna be superseded by Instagram which s…

It's the classic "bootleggers and baptists" strategy for passing regulations. It's worked for hundreds of years.

Re: Bipartisan Legislation to Ban TikTok

#397

Post by KaoruAoiShiho »

mannerheim wrote: post #373
KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there such laws? So the idea isn't reciprocal after all, it's to entirely target one country's companies. https://www.thatsmags.com/china/post/32153/this-day-in-histo... Dragonfly was stopped after pressure from Americans, both civil and political pressure.

That's what this law is about. > In 2018, media reports that Google was working on a prototype for another censored Chinese search engine surfaced, which was met with backlash from some Google employees. The development, called ‘Project Dragonfly,’ was shortly after suspended, according to The Intercept. The US government did not force Google to stop Dragonfly.

Congress called multiple hearings on Dragonfly and many politicians criticized it. China only ever enforced its consistent censorship policies without targeting any foreign company. Doing this you would admit is an aggressive move to target a Chinese company rather than a reciprocal action as the parent insinuated.

Re: Bipartisan Legislation to Ban TikTok

#398

Post by KaoruAoiShiho »

mannerheim wrote: post #387
KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's flat out false, there are no such demands. You should actually look these things up instead of listening to reductive memes. The joint venture system was an anti-colonial idea that was proposed first by the US. It only ever applied to specific strategic industries like banking and autos. Tech companies like Microsoft, apple, etc wholly own their subsidiaries in China.

Tech subsidiaries like AMD?

? Don't understand what you're saying, is it related to my comment?

Re: Bipartisan Legislation to Ban TikTok

#399

Post by Firebrand »

TikTok’s popularity is already waning in the U.S. Installs of the app are down 33% YoY in November, from 6.6MM in November '21 to 4.5MM in November '22. -0.3% YoY worldwide.

In fact, Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp outgrew TikTok and even YouTube during this period:

https://twitter.com/eric_seufert/status/1602045164016615428?...

Re: Bipartisan Legislation to Ban TikTok

#400

Post by three_seagrass »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #269
three_seagrass wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China doesn't ban US tech that obeys the CCP's surveillance laws, like Apple does. This targeting of tiktok is pretty specific by US government, because it singles out a company rather than act as a law.

Therefore the US is free to pass laws that make TikTok illegal by your own reasoning.

Please elaborate on how a law banning a single company is the same as a law that allow companies to comply.
Post reply on HN