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

821–830 of 1001 posts

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

#821

Post by seanmcdirmid »

tw1984 wrote: post #357
maxglute wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a bad argument because western platforms are free to compete fairly in PRC market, provided they follow PRC laws like EVERY OTHER PRC PLATFORM. Facebook/Twitter only got banned after 2009 minority riots for abetting terrorism and not cracking down on posts calling for mutual retaliatory violence. It's more accurate to say most major western platforms at the time was simply incapable of of moderating PRC conten…

> That's a bad argument because western platforms are free to compete fairly in PRC market, provided they follow PRC laws like EVERY OTHER PRC PLATFORM. Dude, Chinese national living in China here. I have 3 different vpns from 3 different vendors, that is how I manage to get here and talk to you. Care to shed some light on why they restrict my free & open access to the Internet that I dedicated my entire life to buil…

> I strongly support CCP's policies in Xinjiang, it is anti-terrorism for sure. That being said, I wouldn't call those angry & brainwashed Tibetans "terrorists".

The weird thing is that the CCP is much more worried about Tibet than Xinjiang. As a foreigner, I can buy a plane ticket to Urumqi today, no restrictions on needing a guide to tour in most places. But Tibet...ugh...so much paper work just to visit Lhasa, and I need a minder if I ever leave Lhasa.

The biggest problem with the party is that they always put hardliners in charge of Tibet and Xinjiang (let's be clear, the party chair controls the autonomous regions, not the ceremonial local governer). They unnecessarily stir the pot to create tension, that then explodes every 10 or so years.

> Because Bill Gates has very good personal relationship with the very top leadership. That is the really scary part.

Microsoft has been in China for a long time, and it has a China-based leadership that is very in tune it is permitted to do or not. "These are the rules, written and unwritten, for keeping Bing in China" and they just roll with that. I don't think it is even Bill, he has been hands off for a decade or two, but there are people in Microsoft's chinese leadership who are well connected.

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

#822

Post by theferalrobot »

theturtletalks wrote: post #762
theferalrobot wrote: post #686

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What rights is it taking away? TikTok will still exist, you will still be able to get to it on the internet. All this bill does is force a sale OR prevent American companies from platforming technology from adversarial nations (something every government does all the time... see the US and Huawei or limiting Nvidia exports to china etc). You'll still be able to download the app from the internet (just not an App Stor…

My mistake then, but what’s the point then? Won’t they come for the website next if TikTok doesn’t sell? I don’t even use TikTok but I know this law will be precedence for other laws blocking outside websites.

Well for one, it could force the sale to a non adversarial nation. Two, if it doesn't it undercuts the companies ability to deliver it on American app platforms, both of which are a positive from the viewpoint of the US government.

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

#824

Post by rightbyte »

n4r9 wrote: post #463
User23 wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's being described isn't an eye for an eye, but tit for tat. And tit for tat is the norm for international relations and has been since time immemorial. Usually it's relatively dull stuff, like if country A requires citizens of country B to have a visa to visit, country B will as a matter of course require citizens of country A to have visas to visit too.

Interesting... "eye for an eye" has an almost identical meaning to "tit for tat" in my mind. Both of them effectively mean "retaliation in kind". One slight difference I guess is that "eye for an eye" often relates specifically to justice or just punishment.

"Tooth for a tooth" is maybe more about exactly the same thing than "tit for tat"?

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

#825

Post by zeroonetwothree »

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?

TikTok has no reason to follow US law. It is doubtful they will allow auditors to ensure compliance.

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

#827

Post by Jochim »

asd88 wrote: post #361
kalverra wrote: post #36

Nate Silver did a nice write up on the probability and implications of all this here: https://open.substack.com/pub/natesilver/p/why-the-political... When Biden passes this bill (which he said he would), I can only assume Dems will lose a large part of the younger voting demographic. If jot now, then 4 years from now. Because no chance in hell is China selling this thing, and Trump is already talking about how much h…

> Because no chance in hell is China selling this thing Didn’t they agree to sell it to Oracle back when Trump threatened to ban it?

Don't know if they ever agreed to sell. IIRC they did partner with Oracle to host their infrastructure, as a way of showing that they were trying to allay US concerns.

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

#828

Post by zeroonetwothree »

ssernikk wrote: post #685

Wouldn't introducing actual privacy laws be better than censoring part of the internet? I doubt that American social media corporations hoard less data about it's users than Chinese. I am not defending TikTok here, because I believe it's a danger, but this new bill is equivalent to treating the symptoms instead of the cause.

Why do you think that a Chinese company would follow American privacy laws? What will we do to them if they violate these laws?

Also I think a lot of the concern isn’t around privacy but rather control of broadcasting.

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

#829

Post by BigParm »

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…

“You have to be a pirate for the pirate’s code to apply”.

Those protections will apply when the platform is owned by American citizens.

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

#830

Post by daveguy »

caekislove wrote: post #752
daveguy wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is not a US citizen.

"Congress shall make no law" doesn't mean "Unless foreigners are involved"

China is not a "foreigner" it's a hostile foreign government.
Post reply on HN