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

US House passes bill to ban TikTok if owners won't divest

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 224 posts

Re: US House passes bill to ban TikTok if owners won't divest

#191

Post by natpalmer1776 »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #180
Jensson wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Answer to Q2 is easy: no. Nobody thinks that companies should be allowed to pledge allegiance to whoever they wish, there are already lots of laws in every country against pledging allegiance to terrorists or being owned by terrorists etc.

Again, a really good example that the framing of the concept begs a specific response. Keep 'em coming. Association and allegiance aren't synonyms.

I absolutely love the way you are engaging with this problem, and really appreciate how you’re trying to make discourse about the fundamental issue rather than the knee-jerk ‘murica “unrationale”.

Personally I support the authoritarian measure against TikTok from a “general” standpoint since I firmly believe the nature of warfare lately has shifted to a more cultural front and thus is a matter of national security; Everything about this would be perfect if not for the glaring issue that is clear favoritism, and not addressing the root problem.

Social media and its corresponding ad-tech at large is a publicly available propaganda engine that can be wielded by the highest state backed bidder via direct ads, or the highest spending intelligence actor via artificial accounts and discourse.

LLM tech has only exacerbated this threat and in a perfect world this legislation would be the first of many steps to curtail the threat before it undermines the country any further.

Now that I’ve said my controversial bits I would love to hear what your thoughts on the matter(s) are!

Re: US House passes bill to ban TikTok if owners won't divest

#192

Post by ThrowawayTestr »

nextaccountic wrote: post #168
Jensson wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't about privacy, this is about influence. CCP having direct chain of authority to control what Americans watch isn't a thing many want.

Are Facebook, Twitter and Google any better?

Yes, they are not Chinese.

Re: US House passes bill to ban TikTok if owners won't divest

#193

Post by nozzlegear »

nextaccountic wrote: post #168
Jensson wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't about privacy, this is about influence. CCP having direct chain of authority to control what Americans watch isn't a thing many want.

Are Facebook, Twitter and Google any better?

As the other person replying to you said: yes. In the eyes of Congress, the answer is obviously and unequivocally yes, because Facebook, Twitter and Google are American companies.

Re: US House passes bill to ban TikTok if owners won't divest

#194

Post by jarjar2_ »

This is a good thing. What nations and governments, along with individuals have been to do with OSINT is pretty stunning.

https://www.wired.com/story/strava-heat-map-military-bases-f...

That was just data Strava was releasing publicly.

The raw data collection from TikTok contains much more than that. Think in terms of all branches of military and government messaging each other perfectly blackmailable things and then automating analysis of that.

Byte Dance says that China doesn't have access to the data and that it hasn't been accessed, but from what I've read they have a party office at the company in China. I simply don't trust a foreign adversary with the amount of data that one of these social platforms generates. Neither does China which is why a large number of services operated in China are hosted on Chinese servers run by local subsidiaries, with vastly different and far more permissive laws when it comes to government/intelligence/law enforcement (all one and the same there) accessing that data.

Hopefully that critical thinking can transfer to what's being done by American companies and intelligence agencies with user data and we can get some actual data privacy legislation at some point and enshrine a law preventing from inserting backdoors in everything that moves.

Re: US House passes bill to ban TikTok if owners won't divest

#195

Post by kelseyfrog »

natpalmer1776 wrote: post #191
kelseyfrog wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, a really good example that the framing of the concept begs a specific response. Keep 'em coming. Association and allegiance aren't synonyms.

I absolutely love the way you are engaging with this problem, and really appreciate how you’re trying to make discourse about the fundamental issue rather than the knee-jerk ‘murica “unrationale”. Personally I support the authoritarian measure against TikTok from a “general” standpoint since I firmly believe the nature of warfare lately has shifted to a more cultural front and thus is a matter of national security; E…

If the choice is who are we going to make in charge of feeding us propaganda then the game is fixed. We play this trick on 4 year olds to make them do what we want and when done to adults it's paternalistic.

Fifteen year old me was right on this one. It's better to burn it down than pick the lesser of two evils. We always reserve the right to create our own options if what's presented to us isn't honest.

Re: US House passes bill to ban TikTok if owners won't divest

#196

Post by natpalmer1776 »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #195
natpalmer1776 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I absolutely love the way you are engaging with this problem, and really appreciate how you’re trying to make discourse about the fundamental issue rather than the knee-jerk ‘murica “unrationale”. Personally I support the authoritarian measure against TikTok from a “general” standpoint since I firmly believe the nature of warfare lately has shifted to a more cultural front and thus is a matter of national security; E…

If the choice is who are we going to make in charge of feeding us propaganda then the game is fixed. We play this trick on 4 year olds to make them do what we want and when done to adults it's paternalistic. Fifteen year old me was right on this one. It's better to burn it down than pick the lesser of two evils. We always reserve the right to create our own options if what's presented to us isn't honest.

Sure the game is rigged so that someone will be feeding us propaganda, that much is a given in today’s society. I don’t believe however it is in any citizen’s best interests to allow a foreign nation to control that propaganda due to the invariably detrimental incentives at play.

The American government is more likely to produce propaganda that promotes an increase in GDP. The increase being won by sacrificing individual autonomy or quality of life is something that is at least in your control (emigrating, voting, lobbying, etc) which makes it the lesser of two evils.

As to burning it down and picking a third option… I agree in principle but recent history rarely supports that path; modern technology and weaponry renders any kind of organized revolution a nonstarter, while other means of subverting the status quo (economically, culturally, etc) have been set up to incentivize those capable of doing so to be completely apathetic in the face of obscene wealth tied directly to upholding said status quo.

Put simply we are in a social construct that is resilient to any significant change in course (or destruction) while still under threat from a foreign social construct that wishes to subvert our society to the benefit of its own.

Re: US House passes bill to ban TikTok if owners won't divest

#197

Post by kelseyfrog »

natpalmer1776 wrote: post #196
kelseyfrog wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the choice is who are we going to make in charge of feeding us propaganda then the game is fixed. We play this trick on 4 year olds to make them do what we want and when done to adults it's paternalistic. Fifteen year old me was right on this one. It's better to burn it down than pick the lesser of two evils. We always reserve the right to create our own options if what's presented to us isn't honest.

Sure the game is rigged so that someone will be feeding us propaganda, that much is a given in today’s society. I don’t believe however it is in any citizen’s best interests to allow a foreign nation to control that propaganda due to the invariably detrimental incentives at play. The American government is more likely to produce propaganda that promotes an increase in GDP. The increase being won by sacrificing indivi…

I'm happy that your view is compatible with you sense of self. That's how I feel about mine too.

Re: US House passes bill to ban TikTok if owners won't divest

#198

Post by natpalmer1776 »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #197
natpalmer1776 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure the game is rigged so that someone will be feeding us propaganda, that much is a given in today’s society. I don’t believe however it is in any citizen’s best interests to allow a foreign nation to control that propaganda due to the invariably detrimental incentives at play. The American government is more likely to produce propaganda that promotes an increase in GDP. The increase being won by sacrificing indivi…

I'm happy that your view is compatible with you sense of self. That's how I feel about mine too.

:/ I was hoping you would debate my views, since everyone seems to either engage in bad faith or refuse to engage at all

C’est la vie I guess

Re: US House passes bill to ban TikTok if owners won't divest

#199

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

sschueller wrote: post #131
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why haven't they? Think hard.

Because the US can break Europe by removing our ability to use the dollar. We are completely attached to it like with swift or visa etc. Until we decouple from the dollar which will probably never happen as the US will prevent it, we will always be under the reign of the United States. China does not have this problem.

Or maybe we are friends/allies and not adversaries? You're over complicating it by ignoring the glaring differences in relations with Europe vs China.

Re: US House passes bill to ban TikTok if owners won't divest

#200

Post by sschueller »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #199
sschueller wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the US can break Europe by removing our ability to use the dollar. We are completely attached to it like with swift or visa etc. Until we decouple from the dollar which will probably never happen as the US will prevent it, we will always be under the reign of the United States. China does not have this problem.

Or maybe we are friends/allies and not adversaries? You're over complicating it by ignoring the glaring differences in relations with Europe vs China.

Friends/allies don't spy on each other. [1] For one second imagine the outrage that would have occurred if it were the other way around.

The US does not operate in the interest if the EU. It will always be "America First" and if that means fucking over a European country or all of Europe, they will. I don't blame them for this as it is in essence their job to protect them selves but Europe needs to realize that even Article 5 in NATO will not protect them if the US doesn't want to.

The US operates on this planet only in their final interest and if that means ignoring international laws and signed treaties so be it. In fact the US has recently claimed that UN Security Council resolutions are non-binding to the outrage of most UN members. [2]

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/08/nsa-tapped-g...

[2] https://english.elpais.com/usa/2024-03-29/us-sparks-controve...

Post reply on HN