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

House passes bill to force TikTok sale from Chinese owner or ban the app

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 1001 posts

Re: House passes bill to force TikTok sale from Chinese owner or ban the app

#181

Post by bhaney »

farleykr wrote: post #52

What are the chances that TikTok really gets comprehensively banned in the US? This seems like the kind of thing that would get stuck in a Bermuda triangle of litigation while nothing ever happens.

Low. ByteDance will do whatever they can to delay enforcement by challenging the law for as long as they can, and in the background they'll setup a new corporate structure that maintains their status quo while technically complying with the law, at which point they'll back off from the legal battle and graciously accept the new law that they've already loopholed their way around.

Re: House passes bill to force TikTok sale from Chinese owner or ban the app

#182

Post by Jcampuzano2 »

Nesco wrote: post #23
andiareso wrote: post #13

I'm a big proponent of free speech and the first amendment, but I agree with the reasonings for banning it or forcing US owners. China most definitely has their hands in the data that TikTok amasses and given its popularity it's not an insignificant risk to U.S. citizens. We all know how easy it is to manipulate users... aka Cambridge Analytica. It'll be interesting to see what legal challenges come up if the bill pa…

Why shouldn’t Europeans do the same with US social networks then?

If they feel there is a sufficient security threat posed by US based social media/apps, then I see no reason why they shouldn't.

But its pretty clear that the security threat posed by US based services vs certain others is starkly different, especially since the US is generally seen as a beneficial/friendly state.

Re: House passes bill to force TikTok sale from Chinese owner or ban the app

#183

Post by which »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #109
throwaway237289 wrote: post #19

Don't be fooled by talk about security or privacy. This is simple Nation State realpolitik. TikTok is a propaganda threat controlled by a non-friendly state to the US. Any other way to look at this is naive.

> TikTok is a propaganda threat controlled by a non-friendly state to the US Yes. Would you have been offended when during the Revolutionary War we restricted British propaganda? German and Nazi propaganda in the World Wars? Soviet propaganda in the Cold War? Let’s reverse the roles. How thrilled would we be if we could have had a propaganda arm active and accepted in Nazi Germany or the CCCP? If we had person-by-per…

I wouldn't be offended but we didn't really do any of that, at least not as a systematic government effort. We required registration of foreign agents which the government used as a basis to stop Nazi propaganda newspapers when they didn't register. But they had the option to register. Sputnik radio is registered and broadcasting today in the US. The strict interpretation of the Espionage Act that Wilson et al wanted was later overturned.

Re: House passes bill to force TikTok sale from Chinese owner or ban the app

#184

Post by drexlspivey »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #63
tmaly wrote: post #41

My understanding is that this is a much broader bill than just TikTok. It would give the president the authority to ban any app or website both foreign and domestic based on the wording of the text of the bill. Can anyone verify if this is true in the text of what was passed?

> would give the president the authority to ban any app or website both foreign and domestic based No, it has to be controlled by a foreign adversary country [1]. The broadest power is in 3(a)(ii) on page 10, which lets the President designate an app as a foreign adversary controlled application if it is a significant national security threat following public notice and reporting requirements. But even then, it’s a d…

What is a foreign adversary? Is there a set list of countries or is it open for interpretation?

Re: House passes bill to force TikTok sale from Chinese owner or ban the app

#185

Post by RobotToaster »

fullshark wrote: post #134
throwaway237289 wrote: post #19

Don't be fooled by talk about security or privacy. This is simple Nation State realpolitik. TikTok is a propaganda threat controlled by a non-friendly state to the US. Any other way to look at this is naive.

I think it's both. You don't think it's possible TikTok usage data is being accumulated for prominent Americans and/or their children for the purpose of intelligence gathering? I'd actually be surprised if it wasn't happening.

I'm sure how terrible American teenagers are at dancing is vital intelligence information.

Re: House passes bill to force TikTok sale from Chinese owner or ban the app

#186

Post by Manuel_D »

RobotToaster wrote: post #173
Manuel_D wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another way to look at it is the fact that China does not let American social media in its market. Why should America give China access to it's markets when that's not reciprocated?

That's false, American social media simply refused to follow Chinese law. (I believe facebook specifically refused to remove accounts belonging to ETIM/TIP, an organisation recognised by the UN, EU and at the time the USA as a terrorist group)

Incorrect, Facebook is flat out banned in China no matter whether they comply with CCP censorship. I'm very interested in sources to substantiate the claim that Facebook is refusing to ban groups that even the US designates as terrorists.

Re: House passes bill to force TikTok sale from Chinese owner or ban the app

#188

Post by nrb »

nickthegreek wrote: post #113
endisneigh wrote: post #22

Pass a privacy law, stop arbitrarily banning. What exactly would be the justification for forcing the sale rather than passing a law solving the actual problem?

The actual problem is threat of algo manipulation in times of crisis. But they apparently don't want to make that their argument. It's the only valid justification imo. Data privacy should apply to all companies.

It’s probably an issue of messaging: telling a population that someone is misusing the information, potentially militarily, is an easier pill to swallow than telling them they are susceptible to algorithmic manipulation by a foreign adversary. And do they even want to open the can of worms about their susceptibility to domestic manipulation?

Re: House passes bill to force TikTok sale from Chinese owner or ban the app

#189

Post by lancesells »

basisword wrote: post #149
fullshark wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's both. You don't think it's possible TikTok usage data is being accumulated for prominent Americans and/or their children for the purpose of intelligence gathering? I'd actually be surprised if it wasn't happening.

...what 'intelligence' would they be gathering though? What actionable intelligence could be cleaned from someones TikTok viewing habits?

Name, age, location, politics, device, amount of time spent, interests, etc.

The easiest actionable thing would be propoganda of some sort, but there's a chance of a lot of smart people working on something that I can't imagine. I'm not saying this happening, but looking at Youtube and Meta, it's not hard to imagine.

Re: House passes bill to force TikTok sale from Chinese owner or ban the app

#190

Post by JumpCrisscross »

which wrote: post #183
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> TikTok is a propaganda threat controlled by a non-friendly state to the US Yes. Would you have been offended when during the Revolutionary War we restricted British propaganda? German and Nazi propaganda in the World Wars? Soviet propaganda in the Cold War? Let’s reverse the roles. How thrilled would we be if we could have had a propaganda arm active and accepted in Nazi Germany or the CCCP? If we had person-by-per…

I wouldn't be offended but we didn't really do any of that, at least not as a systematic government effort. We required registration of foreign agents which the government used as a basis to stop Nazi propaganda newspapers when they didn't register. But they had the option to register. Sputnik radio is registered and broadcasting today in the US. The strict interpretation of the Espionage Act that Wilson et al wanted…

We absolutely restricted distribution of state-controlled news.

We didn’t block it. Same as, even if ByteDance refuses to divest, this bill wouldn’t block TikTok from being accessed on the web. It’s just taking it out of American app stores and off American hosting services.

Post reply on HN