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

211–220 of 224 posts

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

#211

Post by Eisenstein »

derelicta wrote: post #210
Gormo wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US isn't China, and our government is explicitly prohibited from attempting to censor or otherwise curate public media.

And yet it does. Ever wondered how all those fancy action movies got their tanks just like that? Cuz they had to beg the US gov for them; they are pretty much free to use under the condition that you do not critize the government's foreign policy or the army itself. So if you want to make a war movie that is critical of the government, good luck. And thats just one example; there is much more regarding all the "exper…

You missed the word 'explicitly'.

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

#212

Post by bravetraveler »

Auracle wrote: post #174
Jensson wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CCP doesn't control any of those, so they aren't national security issues. Edit: And in non American countries where US influence is a national security issue they are already adding similar laws or putting in similar pressure to ensure USA can't influence their people as much.

Let’s say Meta started really pushing stuff to encourage teens to not join the military. What then?

"it's not authoritarianism when it's something I want"

Nothing should happen, limitations are deliberate

Meta aside we're already here, by the way. The military and VA do this to themselves.

Recruitment strategy is commercials and Call of Duty games, while we see what really happens through our families. Half-ass postings on the Internet aren't even close to the problem.

Tldr: Don't like the news, fix it/make your own. Pray we don't have to rely on the draft.

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

#213

Post by croes »

SR2Z wrote: post #203
croes wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tit for tat? When do European governments get private data about US citizens like the US get per CloudAct?

Plenty of European governments have intelligence-sharing agreements with the US, so I'm not sure what your point is here.

US agencies have access to more data from EU citizens than, conversely, EU agencies have access to data from US citizens.

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

#214

Post by mensetmanusman »

kjhcvkek77 wrote: post #188
mensetmanusman wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tit for tat is actually the known optimum solution for these game theoretic interactions.

That's not quite right. Always defecting is game theoretically optimal. However, under realistic conditions, where many agents are predisposed to cooperate but some do not that's where a tit for tat strategy can work incredibly well. That people are predisposed to cooperate is an assumption you have to make, it cannot be derived from the rules of the game itself.

Always defecting doesn't work when the adversary has memory:)

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

#215

Post by licebmi__at__ »

Clubber wrote: post #208
licebmi__at__ wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s be real. The kid gloves would be off for any country, democratic or otherwise, that tries to compete on economic throughput and global influence with the US. Unless you’re trying to argue that the rapid economic growth happened because they are not democratic, the idea that democracy has any relevance on US relations is laughable propaganda. If the countries were really school kids, then I might accommodate for…

I think if you look past the last few news cycles and back into the 70s and especially the 90s, you'll better understand what our strategy with China has been. >I think the hopes were that China, once prospering in the global marketplace as a big player, would turn democratic. Over the last decade or two, we've come to realize the opposite has happened and the Western powers are adjusting. Which part of that do you d…

I guess I disagree with everything. But mostly I disagree that anyone serious actually thought that entering on a global marketplace would turn any kind of nation democratic... but I mean people at the top can have any kind of ideologies, I shouldn't consider impossible that somebody actually bought the magical markets propaganda.

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

#217

Post by kelseyfrog »

natpalmer1776 wrote: post #198
kelseyfrog wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I have contact info in bio. This isn't one I want to debate publically or using rhetoric.

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

#218

Post by Clubber »

licebmi__at__ wrote: post #215
Clubber wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if you look past the last few news cycles and back into the 70s and especially the 90s, you'll better understand what our strategy with China has been. >I think the hopes were that China, once prospering in the global marketplace as a big player, would turn democratic. Over the last decade or two, we've come to realize the opposite has happened and the Western powers are adjusting. Which part of that do you d…

I guess I disagree with everything. But mostly I disagree that anyone serious actually thought that entering on a global marketplace would turn any kind of nation democratic... but I mean people at the top can have any kind of ideologies, I shouldn't consider impossible that somebody actually bought the magical markets propaganda.

>But mostly I disagree that anyone serious actually thought that entering on a global marketplace would turn any kind of nation democratic...

There's certainly research on the subject.

https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/economic-integration-and-tran...

Exploiting improvements in air, relative to sea, transportation that occurred since the 1960s, and combining survey data with country level measures of democracy from 1960 to 2015, the authors document that trade with democracies increases both citizens’ support for democracy and countries’ democracy scores. Trade with non-democracies has no impact on either attitudes or institutions.

According to our results, doubling trade with democracies (a change in exposure equivalent to the inter-quartile range in our sample) increases an individual’s support for democracy by 0.58 points on a 1 to 4 scale. This is similar to the difference in attitudes towards democracy between Mexico and Norway, or that between Philippines and Italy. At the country level, our estimates imply that increasing trade with democratic partners by 80% (or its inter-quartile range) raises the democracy score by around 4 points (on a scale from -10 to +10). This is equivalent to the gap between Malaysia and Canada in 2010, or that between Turkey and Senegal in 2015.

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

#219

Post by Gormo »

derelicta wrote: post #210
Gormo wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US isn't China, and our government is explicitly prohibited from attempting to censor or otherwise curate public media.

And yet it does. Ever wondered how all those fancy action movies got their tanks just like that? Cuz they had to beg the US gov for them; they are pretty much free to use under the condition that you do not critize the government's foreign policy or the army itself. So if you want to make a war movie that is critical of the government, good luck. And thats just one example; there is much more regarding all the "exper…

So the examples you're citing are all of the US government attempting to influence media through incentives and quid-pro-quo arrangements, i.e. exactly the same way every other organization in our society attempts to do so, precisely because it is not able to exercise any sort of direct political power over the media in the way that China does.

I'm sure this legislation will be almost immediately overturned by the courts. It has severe first amendment and fifth amendment problems, along with possibly being an illegal bill of attainder.

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

#220

Post by nearbuy »

maeil wrote: post #116
nearbuy wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it a security concern compared to everything else we get from China, or are we just holding TikTok specifically to an unattainably high standard? We get so many products from China that could potentially be used for spying that we've never tried to ban due to security concerns. Who can say the ESP32 Wifi module doesn't have a hardware or software backdoor hidden in it? AFAIK, there has never been any evidence or r…

> AFAIK, there has never been any evidence or reason to suspect TikTok of sharing private data from Americans with the Chinese government. It seems like simply being from China is the crime the US government wants to ban TikTok for. https://fortune.com/2024/04/15/tiktok-china-data-sharing-byt... If you're going to argue that sending data to Bytedance in Beijing isn't sending it to the Chinese government, you're free…

Do you have any such evidence? You linked a paywalled article saying that TikTok works with its parent company, which is hardly news. We're looking for evidence that TikTok/ByteDance shared private data from Americans with the Chinese government. US politicians would love to get such evidence.
Post reply on HN