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

141–150 of 273 posts

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#141

Post by kube-system »

TheRealPomax wrote: post #90
ejlxsh wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can’t you ban an app based on purpose, “they’re using the app to spy on us”, and then case law applies it on an app by app basis?

What purpose, though? Because if the purpose is "you're not allowed to spy", you can't ban software until you prove they're spying. And the US already has multiple laws that cover that problem, with courts being entirely allowed to rule that a product must be taken off the US market, be that a physical product or software. This is congress trying to ban a named product by bypassing the courts, in order not to have to…

> until you prove they're spying.

Not that I agree with the premise above, but:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/dec/22/tiktok-by...

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#142

Post by calibas »

paganel wrote: post #129
calibas wrote: post #113

The problem with the RESTRICT act isn't that it punishes China or bans TikTok, the problem is the harsh penalties (up to $1 million USD and 20 years in prison) for US citizens who try to bypass government censorship. Even calling it the "TikTok ban" is rather misleading.

> (up to $1 million USD and 20 years in prison) Is that really on the table? If yes, then it's bat-s*it insane, it's maybe rude to call it that but there's no better word to describe it. To put it in perspective, throughout the '80s people were not getting sent to 20 years in prison for listening to Radio Free Europe here in Eastern Europe. There were still some political prisoners left, put in prison under different…

"A person who willfully commits, willfully attempts to commit, or willfully conspires to commit, or aids or abets in the commission of an unlawful act described in subsection (a) shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $1,000,000, or if a natural person, may be imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both."

The lawmakers behind the bill assure us it will only be used against "corporations and executives who conspire to evade a mitigation order or ban — not everyday Americans". However, there's nothing in the bill that excludes "everyday Americans" from the penalties.

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#143

Post by paganel »

RGamma wrote: post #57
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…

On the longer horizon it's probably more useful: Rotting minds, sowing discord, making users depressed, addicted and stupid, derailing culture and public discourse. Not unlike the companies who are in that game already (but for different reasons).

> Rotting minds, sowing discord, making users depressed,

Nothing that Hollywood and the Western music industry haven't already done to our young minds here Eastern European back in the '80s.

It's not Reagan's StarWars madness that made the communist governments fall, but Star Wars the movie itself, and Michael Jackson, and Madonna, and countless other such Western propaganda (because that's what it was, even though I personally was in love with much of said Western propaganda as a kid).

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#144

Post by winter_blue »

wolverine876 wrote: post #112
RyEgswuCsn wrote: post #104

I don't think it is just about TikTok being capable of spying on foreign users; my opinion is that it is more about TikTok's propaganda potential, i.e. how it can be used to manipulate narratives in the most subtle way against U.S.'s national interest. Imagine the case where the U.S. government would like the (western) world to form certain sentiments on the current regional conflicts that are aligned with its own in…

Propaganda is widely used on social media. Why focus on TikTok? Other countries have laws and agencies to protect against propaganda; the US doesn't bother. I doubt the propaganda concern is driving political will.

> Propaganda is widely used on social media

(GP) > how it can be used to manipulate narratives

On the domestic side of things, Elon Musk is doing this, to an extreme degree, with X/Twitter. I'm someone that follows mostly left-wing/liberal/progressive accounts, yet I keep seeing tweets on my feed (even in the "For you" timeline) from right-wing accounts (that I don't follow).

It's extremely annoying, and it is plain as day obvious that Elon Musk is trying to use Twitter to push the entire U.S. more so in a right-wing direction.

Some of these unwelcome accounts on my feed are anti-Trump conservatives (i.e. The Lincoln Project variety of conservatives)--and even this seems to be carefully engineered by Musk's Twitter/X. X must have recognized that I have left-wing political views, and decided to show me account of milder conservatives, to try to gently sway me in that direction.

Occasionally though, and especially in tweet replies, I often see replies of extreme conservatives (including the openly white nationalist and anti-Semitic kinds. It's truly horrifying how much these voices are being amplified.

Some of it probably has to do with the fact that X's fee-based "Verified" users are being amplified, and the "Verified" user base skews heavily to the right, since likely only they feel comfortable with paying a monthly fee to a right-wing unhinged billionaire[1].

Elon Musk is running one of the largest social-media propaganda campaigns in recent history. In terms of scale, one could even think of the billions sunk into buying Twitter essentially as political spending, considering how Twitter/X has now been transformed into a giant covert right-wing influence machine.

[1] I do pay for Premium Connectivity on my Telsa (which I purchased before Elon Musk went Peter Thiel-style crazy), but Premium Connectivity is pretty much a necessity for me on a Tesla. I personally find Musk's politics (and generally GOP politics) to be beyond-the-pale vile evil and disgusting, to the point that I might be compelled to hold off on my 3-year-old Cybertruck reservation if the Cybertruck actually ever comes into mass production (at a non-inflated price). But, hopefully, someone like Bernie Sanders wins and we tax billionaires out of existence (for example, if Congress enacts a one-time 90% wealth tax on accumulated assets in excess of $500 million)--that would put to rest my discomfort with buying a new Tesla when Musk still has ownership over a significant chunk over Tesla.....

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#145

Post by jjcon »

lukev wrote: post #23

I haven't heard a good explanation yet for whether this is even legal. It seems like a textbook example of an unconstitutional bill of attainder. You'd have to ban TikTok based on something it does , and any such law would impact a lot of other companies too. Or I guess you could ban all Chinese software using trade laws, but that has even bigger ramifications.

I don’t understand how people don’t think the government doesn’t have the authority to regulate international commerce. They literally do this all the time, banning trade or goods from one country or another. I don’t think any country in the world guarantees citizens access to the international market.

I think for some reason since this is more public facing people seem to think it is somehow different than bans on Russian firearms or engaging with literally any commerce with Iran.

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#146

Post by AlexandrB »

henriquez wrote: post #54

Civil liberties group hated the RESTRICT Act because it basically gives the executive branch unilateral authority to censor web sites, which is why it stalled despite “support from senior leaders in both parties.” The RESTRICT Act sounds like, and actually is censorship. That’s why the Biden admin is hard at work repackaging it as the HAPPY Act.

Many on HN seem to have "TikTok Derangement Syndrome". If this was any other app, I think many people here would be up in arms about government restrictions on what apps they can install.

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#147

Post by jcranmer »

paganel wrote: post #129
calibas wrote: post #113

The problem with the RESTRICT act isn't that it punishes China or bans TikTok, the problem is the harsh penalties (up to $1 million USD and 20 years in prison) for US citizens who try to bypass government censorship. Even calling it the "TikTok ban" is rather misleading.

> (up to $1 million USD and 20 years in prison) Is that really on the table? If yes, then it's bat-s*it insane, it's maybe rude to call it that but there's no better word to describe it. To put it in perspective, throughout the '80s people were not getting sent to 20 years in prison for listening to Radio Free Europe here in Eastern Europe. There were still some political prisoners left, put in prison under different…

Honestly, no. It's a maximum penalty, and maximum penalties don't really matter unless you're doing some deeply serious shit under sentencing guidelines--it takes an offense level of 37 with no prior criminal history to potentially hit a 20 year sentence.

I don't know what the base offense level of such a crime would be, but from looking around some of the other things that's similar, I suspect you would be looking at about a 10 or so--or a year or so in prison.

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#148

Post by rchaud »

usernomdeguerre wrote: post #61
lukev wrote: post #23

I haven't heard a good explanation yet for whether this is even legal. It seems like a textbook example of an unconstitutional bill of attainder. You'd have to ban TikTok based on something it does , and any such law would impact a lot of other companies too. Or I guess you could ban all Chinese software using trade laws, but that has even bigger ramifications.

Are national security arguments not legal? My understanding was that Chinese Tech companies are required by law to serve as (willing or unwilling) arms of the domestic spy agency in China.

National security arguments can only go so far without falling afoul of Constitutional principles. Earlier versions of this bill failed because their breadth made it clear it could be used in situations not involving China or other 'bad' tech actors.

A blanket ban on "Chinese tech" is immeasurably broad, and would harm legitimate business interests. Should Microsoft, Cisco and Oracle stop doing business in the country if they're selling products and services to Chinese tech firms?

Correspondingly, Tencent has holdings in many American companies, Reddit and Twitter being two. Should Reddit be forced to buy out their holdings?

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#149

Post by dylan604 »

soylentcola wrote: post #139

Wisdom of any legislation aside, I'm curious how you can effectively "ban" a program or a website. It seems futile to ban the distribution of software, and while you can get ISPs to block access to an IP/range, there are easy ways around this. See also: torrents of unlicensed-everything and the use of mirrors, proxies, etc. to access the sites that index them. Not saying it wouldn't put a dent in use, but if all I ha…

Naturally, this is where Apple's walled garden comes to play. Ban the app from the walled garden, and the lack of ability of side loading apps becomes the greatest defense of national security. do your part America!!!

Re: Lawmakers shift gears on TikTok ban

#150

Post by usernomdeguerre »

lilyball wrote: post #130
RyEgswuCsn wrote: post #104

I don't think it is just about TikTok being capable of spying on foreign users; my opinion is that it is more about TikTok's propaganda potential, i.e. how it can be used to manipulate narratives in the most subtle way against U.S.'s national interest. Imagine the case where the U.S. government would like the (western) world to form certain sentiments on the current regional conflicts that are aligned with its own in…

This argument always strikes me as weird given that we know domestic social networks are doing precisely this, adjusting their algorithms to promote or suppress things for political reasons, but I have yet to see any claim that TikTok has ever done this, only that they could .

Given that we've learned about western companies practices here as a result of whistleblowers it seems unlikely we'll see that from Bytedance. Especially considering how they've treated whistleblowers so far.
Post reply on HN