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

631–640 of 1001 posts

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

#631

Post by ramesh31 »

0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #493
ramesh31 wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If China is unwilling to allow US companies to compete fairly in their digital ecosystem, why the hell should we continue to grant Chinese firms unrestricted access to our market? Because we are the United States, and we are better than that. We are a society that promotes free trade, freedom of expression, and economic globalization to the ends of the earth. It's kind of our whole thing.

How many democratic governments have been overthrown with US assistance because it benefited oil or fruit companies?

>How many democratic governments have been overthrown with US assistance because it benefited oil or fruit companies?

This century? None. The civilized world has progressed. Hopefully our Chinese and Russian friends can catch up some day.

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

#632

Post by aaomidi »

harkinian wrote: post #345
aaomidi wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TikTok has been the only popular social media network in the US not censoring Israeli crimes on Palestinians. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/dec/21/meta-face... https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/2/28/twitter-under-f... https://www.vox.com/culture/23997305/tiktok-palestine-israel... There is a reason this is one of the things that's passing with bipartisan support. Both parties are excusing, and are…

The Guardian, Al Jazeera, and Vox claim censorship. Is there something more credible, maybe AIPAC themselves publicly backing the TikTok ban, or some strong correlation between AIPAC contributions and House votes on the bill?

We have this: https://twitter.com/PamKeithFL/status/1767922368997970380

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/tiktok-ban-israel-...

https://www.newarab.com/news/us-pro-israel-jewish-group-back...

Most of the time the lobbying isn't happening out in public. But once it takes momentum, the lobbies usually start publicly backing it.

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

#633

Post by zachmu »

throwaway199956 wrote: post #613
zachmu wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tiktok isn't "some website", it is partially owned and controlled by the CCP, which influences what content gets shown to Americans. A majority of zoomers get most of their news and information primarily from this platform, which again is under the influence of a hostile foreign government. (TikTok also spies on US citizens for the CCP, but let's keep this restricted to the free speech argument about the ban). We act…

Doesn't first ammendment protect even that. Propaganda of other countries are legal under first ammendment. Why should we be a nanny state that should dictate which apps one can or cannot use on one's device. Also even at the hight of cold war, Soviet Life magazine was published and disseminated widely in the US.

A US citizen distributing foreign media themselves is quite different than what is effectively a directly controlled broadcast owned by a foreign government.

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

#634

Post by WheatMillington »

codekaze wrote: post #213

I think the primary argument for banning TikTok should be based on reciprocity rather than moral and/or security concerns. We can make similar arguments about the negative effects of Facebook, Instagram, and etc. even from the POVs of other countries, but the key issue here is that China heavily restricts foreign apps and services from operating in their market. If China is unwilling to allow US companies to compete…

>If China is unwilling to allow US companies to compete fairly in their digital ecosystem, why the hell should we continue to grant Chinese firms unrestricted access to our market?

Because there is value in holding the moral high ground.

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

#635

Post by 0cf8612b2e1e »

jf22 wrote: post #536
0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many democratic governments have been overthrown with US assistance because it benefited oil or fruit companies?

Good point but it doesn't mean that US doesn't support those things the majority of the time. The primary motivation of a firefighter doesn't change because they rescue a cat every once in a while.

Not the point, but firefighters actually respond to few fires (presumably better electrical codes or smokers falling asleep with a cigarette). Most of their work is now supplemental EMT, locked houses, cats in trees, etc.

This 2018 report (https://www.statista.com/statistics/376683/number-of-fire-de...) shows some 23 million medical emergencies to 1.5 million fire call responses.

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

#636

Post by throwaway199956 »

zachmu wrote: post #633
throwaway199956 wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't first ammendment protect even that. Propaganda of other countries are legal under first ammendment. Why should we be a nanny state that should dictate which apps one can or cannot use on one's device. Also even at the hight of cold war, Soviet Life magazine was published and disseminated widely in the US.

A US citizen distributing foreign media themselves is quite different than what is effectively a directly controlled broadcast owned by a foreign government.

Listening to foreign radio stations on shortwave and listening their propaganda is also not illegal in the US.

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

#637

Post by cangeroo »

throwaway199956 wrote: post #613
zachmu wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tiktok isn't "some website", it is partially owned and controlled by the CCP, which influences what content gets shown to Americans. A majority of zoomers get most of their news and information primarily from this platform, which again is under the influence of a hostile foreign government. (TikTok also spies on US citizens for the CCP, but let's keep this restricted to the free speech argument about the ban). We act…

Doesn't first ammendment protect even that. Propaganda of other countries are legal under first ammendment. Why should we be a nanny state that should dictate which apps one can or cannot use on one's device. Also even at the hight of cold war, Soviet Life magazine was published and disseminated widely in the US.

Do foreign nationals have the same rights as Americans?

Foreign companies shouldn't have the same protections.

And in many countries, locally-operating subsidiaries are required to have majority ownership by citizens, partly to prevent foreign influence.

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

#639

Post by arrosenberg »

jrockway wrote: post #486
codekaze wrote: post #213

I think the primary argument for banning TikTok should be based on reciprocity rather than moral and/or security concerns. We can make similar arguments about the negative effects of Facebook, Instagram, and etc. even from the POVs of other countries, but the key issue here is that China heavily restricts foreign apps and services from operating in their market. If China is unwilling to allow US companies to compete…

I don't think we should "lowest common denominator" to oppressive regimes. Our Constitution says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." TikTok, at the end of the day, is just a kind of…

Algorithmic content is not free speech. The government can't make Facebook censor this message or that message, but they can certainly restrict the usage of algorithmic content feeds - that is not protected by the first amendment. I'm not just talking about Tiktok either, this is the issue they should be legislating on, and it should target all social media companies.

There is also legislation giving them to right to regulate foreign ownership of companies. It's scary how much of our stuff is owned by foreign governments. Seems like a national security risk.

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

#640

Post by ScoobleDoodle »

bilekas wrote: post #387
codekaze wrote: post #213

I think the primary argument for banning TikTok should be based on reciprocity rather than moral and/or security concerns. We can make similar arguments about the negative effects of Facebook, Instagram, and etc. even from the POVs of other countries, but the key issue here is that China heavily restricts foreign apps and services from operating in their market. If China is unwilling to allow US companies to compete…

> If China is unwilling to allow US companies to compete fairly in their digital ecosystem, why the hell should we continue to grant Chinese firms unrestricted access to our market? I understand what you're saying and I actually support the ban as tiktok can be used as a giant botnet at-will by Chinas government, but an eye for an eye doesn't end well and the US is supposed to be "free" so this part of the argument I…

"eye for an eye" is actually a retaliation limiter, not a call to arms. It means if someone pokes out your eye, then you are limited to a maximum retaliation of poking out their eye. You are not allowed to kill them.

For this China having TikTok spread propaganda or addiction in the USA does not then give the USA permission to nuke China as a consequence.

Post reply on HN