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

Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 273 posts

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#31

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

voisin wrote: post #29
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Everything that is physically possible becomes a possibility, limited only by their creativity.

> Gather mac addresses that are nearby. Maybe your neighbor is a general and your phone can snoop when they are around. Would this be possible from an app within either iOS or Android?

Sorry, I removed the quote because I thought my reply was getting too long.

To answer- It must be possible, for it to be impossible there would have to be no more vulnerabilities for both platforms and we know that's not the case.

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#32

Post by vkou »

wyldberry wrote: post #30
vkou wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The way I see it is this: If war were to break out between the US and China right now, what could they do with tiktok? If you're directing your peace-time policy based on a hypothetical worst that can be done in war-time, you're going to have really insane peace-time policies. If war were to break out tomorrow, we might want to institute a draft, I guess we should start drafting people now? Nobody would blink twice…

There's never been a more ripe time for a third axis to open up stretching and bankrupting America. In America, and the west, we think often in terms of binary peace/war. This is not the same philosophy shared by those who wish to replace America as the world power. It's good to have the frameworks in place to execute these things when we need them and it's my opinion that we will need them in the next five years.

America will be replaced as a unipolar world power, it's a question of simple mathematics and economics and time. You'll get over it, same as the Brits did last century.

Instead of doubling down on paranoia of the foreign 33-dimensional chess player[1], if you want the US to strengthen itself, look at dealing with its internal enemies and problems, as opposed to clutching pearls at external ones. All of our injuries are self-inflicted.

[1] I'll note that the Department of State isn't stupid, it plays similar, long-planning games that you ascribe to foreign powers.

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#33

Post by coldpie »

gardenhedge wrote: post #28
coldpie wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we agree that that's bad, why do we allow Facebook to do it? Why not craft a ban on the bad behavior, which would then necessarily also preclude Tiktok from doing it?

Because the US government has more authority over Facebook than it does for a Chinese tech company.

I don't understand how. If Facebook or Tiktok('s US branch) violates some law against whatever bad behavior, we can punish them or shut them down. If we don't have such a law, then by definition we have no control over it. What is the difference?

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#34

Post by [deleted] »

vkou wrote: post #32
wyldberry wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's never been a more ripe time for a third axis to open up stretching and bankrupting America. In America, and the west, we think often in terms of binary peace/war. This is not the same philosophy shared by those who wish to replace America as the world power. It's good to have the frameworks in place to execute these things when we need them and it's my opinion that we will need them in the next five years.

America will be replaced as a unipolar world power, it's a question of simple mathematics and economics and time. You'll get over it, same as the Brits did last century. Instead of doubling down on paranoia of the foreign 33-dimensional chess player[1], if you want the US to strengthen itself, look at dealing with its internal enemies and problems, as opposed to clutching pearls at external ones. All of our injuries…

[deleted]

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#35

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

vkou wrote: post #27
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #12

The way I see it is this: If war were to break out between the US and China right now, what could they do with tiktok? I think they could censor victories and raise losses or fabricated stories, sow doubt at a minimum. Make dead american soldiers trend. Whether we like it or not, most teens get news from tiktok. At a maximum they could brick 150 million phones, use them to ddos, use them to hack/disrupt, etc. steal b…

> The way I see it is this: If war were to break out between the US and China right now, what could they do with tiktok? If you're directing your peace-time policy based on a hypothetical worst that can be done in war-time, you're going to have really insane peace-time policies. If war were to break out tomorrow, we might want to institute a draft, I guess we should start drafting people now? Nobody would blink twice…

> If you're directing your peace-time policy based on a hypothetical worst that can be done in war-time

Not necessarily. Relations with most countries are either stable, trending positive, or they are not a threat. China is big enough to be a threat with relations that are trending in the wrong direction. I think it's merely trying to make smart policy prediction.

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#36

Post by vkou »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #35
vkou wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The way I see it is this: If war were to break out between the US and China right now, what could they do with tiktok? If you're directing your peace-time policy based on a hypothetical worst that can be done in war-time, you're going to have really insane peace-time policies. If war were to break out tomorrow, we might want to institute a draft, I guess we should start drafting people now? Nobody would blink twice…

> If you're directing your peace-time policy based on a hypothetical worst that can be done in war-time Not necessarily. Relations with most countries are either stable, trending positive, or they are not a threat. China is big enough to be a threat with relations that are trending in the wrong direction. I think it's merely trying to make smart policy prediction.

Why is this a smart policy decision, but restarting a draft and cutting the phone and internet lines[1] isn't? You've put a five year timeframe on this! That's a 'we need to act yesterday' in political terms!

[1] After all, I can only imagine what will be done in war-time with a telephone connection - and it's not going to be good!

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#37

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

vkou wrote: post #36
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you're directing your peace-time policy based on a hypothetical worst that can be done in war-time Not necessarily. Relations with most countries are either stable, trending positive, or they are not a threat. China is big enough to be a threat with relations that are trending in the wrong direction. I think it's merely trying to make smart policy prediction.

Why is this a smart policy decision, but restarting a draft and cutting the phone and internet lines[1] isn't? You've put a five year timeframe on this! That's a 'we need to act yesterday' in political terms! [1] After all, I can only imagine what will be done in war-time with a telephone connection - and it's not going to be good!

We can walk and chew gum, I'm sure all of those are on the table as well.

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#38

Post by vkou »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #37
vkou wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is this a smart policy decision, but restarting a draft and cutting the phone and internet lines[1] isn't? You've put a five year timeframe on this! That's a 'we need to act yesterday' in political terms! [1] After all, I can only imagine what will be done in war-time with a telephone connection - and it's not going to be good!

We can walk and chew gum, I'm sure all of those are on the table as well.

> I'm sure all of those are on the table as well.

They aren't 'on the table' in any sense of the word. I'm not opening the papers every other week, and seeing yet another take on 'Restart the draft', and 'Cut the phone lines' proposals getting kicked around Congress.

They are kept as options in the event of hostilities, but unlike this ban (Which you use the same justifications to support), nobody's shouting that they need to be done yesterday.

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#39

Post by mrguyorama »

croes wrote: post #25
NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could data-mine for the kids of generals and colonels, see when daddy (or mommy) wasn't home until 2am, and infer that something big's happening. They could see on some nobody's kid that lives one town over from the base that traffic has been heavier or lighter at a certain date, just from watching the kid dance down the sidewalk. Tiktok's like having a spy camera that floats around randomly, taking pictures. 99…

And all of a sudden privacy and data protection are important. Maybe the USA and China should sign a data protection agreement and call it Safe Harbor or so.

The US government wanting privacy but only from foreign nations is a perfectly logical and consistent policy from a government that thinks it has a right to it's citizen's data but also understands that privacy is valuable. It's no different from a US court having a right to sign a warrant for your data while China has no right to obtain a US citizen's data through a chinese equivalent of a warrant.

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#40

Post by mrguyorama »

voisin wrote: post #29
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. Everything that is physically possible becomes a possibility, limited only by their creativity.

> Gather mac addresses that are nearby. Maybe your neighbor is a general and your phone can snoop when they are around. Would this be possible from an app within either iOS or Android?

>Gather mac addresses that are nearby.

If an app has "coarse location" permissions, I believe it can already do this, or at least could do this a few years ago. Phones give quick, inaccurate location data based on what WiFi SSIDs are around. Google started their database of those SSIDs by wardriving and logging everything. There was a court case about it.

Post reply on HN