131–140 of 741 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
TikTok has a US business presence and definitely can be subpoenaed for information. This is not something you have to speculate about, they clearly outline the process for law enforcement to get information: https://www.tiktok.com/legal/page/global/law-enforcement/en
I think OP is talking about the backdoor, full access that US companies give agencies like the NSA. Not subpoenas.
I feel like they could have done this by creating a bill saying that US social media companies must be given the same access and freedoms to the Chinese market as TikTok has to ours. It would put the onus back on the CCP, they would never allow it and they would get TikTok banned in the US without being the ones to directly ban it. I am sure someone smarter than I can tell me why this is not a viable strategy.
Forward to today, somehow TikTok operating in US while compliant to US laws managed outcompeted US platforms. At this point even putting the finger down on some sort of joint venture like Oracle proposal, like how icloud in PRC is under domestic management (a very PRC solution) isn't enough to tip scales back to domestic incumbents. Hence bill to ban, or divest, which to be clear, even PRC hasn't resorted to because they already had regulations to limit influence / scope of US platforms. Playing "fair" is not viable anymore because TikToks is too big, as is the associated risk, so nothing left but nuclear option because TikTok won playing fair.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tiktok is not just a dumb video host. They chose the content they show to users. And the content their system is shoving in users faces is destructive.
Are you saying there are engineers sitting behind their laptops who upvote the "bathroom destruction" trend in some kind of global dashboard? You sound very certain about the degree of control they have over recommendation systems.
I am no conspiracy theorist, but at some point we need to accept the countless proof we keep reading about tech used maliciously once your app reaches a significant mass of users, especially if those users live in a country you are in a bona-fide economic war with.
Some degree of skepticism is healthy, but propaganda thrives any time a skeptic dismisses valid concerns.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
China has banned nearly all US social networks already so is this really surprising given the current status quo?
Because China has strict censorship laws, so should the US?
Sucks for us Westerners to see our Internet firewalled, but that's what happens when you're in a war, whatever its nature. Everybody pays for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
TikTok has a US business presence and definitely can be subpoenaed for information. This is not something you have to speculate about, they clearly outline the process for law enforcement to get information: https://www.tiktok.com/legal/page/global/law-enforcement/en
I think OP is talking about the backdoor, full access that US companies give agencies like the NSA. Not subpoenas.
If the concern is privacy and security, which apply to all social media platforms, then why not pass actual privacy and security laws that would apply equally to all social media platforms, regardless of who currently owns it or may own it in the future?
The issue is that tiktok told congress that US data was inaccessible in China but there is evidence of Chinese nationals accessing american journalist's data in China. Also I'm sure big tech lobbying is playing a large role here too, but that's the cover story at least.
If the concern is privacy and security, which apply to all social media platforms, then why not pass actual privacy and security laws that would apply equally to all social media platforms, regardless of who currently owns it or may own it in the future?
The politicians don't want to touch privacy or security laws since that would negatively impact their benefactors as opposed to actually doing their jobs for their constituents.
Its a power grab, hopefully it won't get passed because of the loose undefined wording that could apply to anything they so choose like in ways described in Ayn Rand.
I feel like they could have done this by creating a bill saying that US social media companies must be given the same access and freedoms to the Chinese market as TikTok has to ours. It would put the onus back on the CCP, they would never allow it and they would get TikTok banned in the US without being the ones to directly ban it. I am sure someone smarter than I can tell me why this is not a viable strategy.
Because US/western social media has same market access to PRC... all they have to do is follow PRC regulations. Literally why FB and Google had internal projects to engineer compliant products to re-enter PRC market, but killed due to internal dissent. The narrative that PRC bans US platforms was always cope. Google pulled out because they didn't like dissidents being hacked, when operationally and eventually they sh…
I don't feel any sympathy for Tiktok considering they block and remove content that goes against the CCP's narratives. So yeah, it's fair game when they do shit like that.
[flagged]
I feel like they could have done this by creating a bill saying that US social media companies must be given the same access and freedoms to the Chinese market as TikTok has to ours. It would put the onus back on the CCP, they would never allow it and they would get TikTok banned in the US without being the ones to directly ban it. I am sure someone smarter than I can tell me why this is not a viable strategy.
Because US/western social media has same market access to PRC... all they have to do is follow PRC regulations. Literally why FB and Google had internal projects to engineer compliant products to re-enter PRC market, but killed due to internal dissent. The narrative that PRC bans US platforms was always cope. Google pulled out because they didn't like dissidents being hacked, when operationally and eventually they sh…
>> Because US/western social media has same market access to PRC
I do not believe that the preferred platforms of the CCP, owned and operated by the same people, would not be favored in China. There is no open or transparent lobbying in China. Rather, overnight, someone from the CCP can decide that your platform should be shut down and your employees harassed, arrested and/or prosecuted. Yes, the market is huge, but why would any western company take that chance. For all its flaws, the US doesn't have these issues to this level. The TikTok debate is happening relatively slowly and a lot of it in the open (So our politicians can showboat, but still). TikTok also has access to the best lawyers, lobbyists, as well as grounds for appeal. Those in power will also be politically assailed by their opponents on behalf of those under 35 for shutting down their favored platform. People could conceivably lose office for the decision.
>> Forward to today, somehow TikTok operating in US while compliant to US laws managed outcompeted US platforms.
No argument here - TikTok has done amazing and has played by the rules (though if you have pile of nearly infinite money from a powerful government, you can do a lot). I'd argue that realpolitik, is alive and well, always has been and always will be. TikTok can both influence (which I'm less worried about thanks to the other avenues of free speech) but TikTok can also collect and retain the moral and legal trespass of the young for decades to then use it as blackmail when they are the ones seeking positions of power. You could argue the same for all the other socials, and I think their data retention is what should really be limited, but they are at least within the confines of a legal system, that yes, has flaws, but is open enough.
I'm not naive enough to believe the US is devoid of corruption, backroom deals, people whose rights are denied or trampled on etc. But compared to the CCP's framework, there is no debate.
Personally, I think TikTok has a first amendment right to exist regardless of who owns it. It's the data retention that really worries me, and unless you count data as property (which I could be convinced of), there is not right to data retention.