171–180 of 342 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The difference is that there is a non-zero amount of friction in the US. This kind of statement should always end with "for now". Data lives forever, laws change. Just take a look at Roe v. Wade and how formerly benign data now has potential legal implications for users.
Thankfully we have a statute of limitations for many legal matters
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sort of a fruit of a poisoned well - if prior trade action hadn’t been transparently lying about a national security pretext warning about TikTok would have been received better.
Oh please. The people who complained didn't care about that. They didn't like Trump, and would complain about anything he did regardless of the merit. They are nakedly partisan.
But the broader public, reporters, and experts absolutely base their decisions on how trustworthy they find rationales. National security arguments often boil down to “we are correct but can’t tell you why, trust us.”
Mixing trade wars into that certainly helps skepticism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
would you not make the same argument for google?
Yes, but Google is on our, well "my" side. I would expect an "adversary" nationstate, like China, to respond with similar alarm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
TikTok is a spectacular example of both human- and democracy-hacking. It's like an authoritarian regime saw facebook in 2012 and said, "hold my beverage of choice."
> authoritarian regime saw facebook in 2012 and said What a weird statement. Facebook has been taking all of that data for a long time. Some of the protections in Android and iOS were specifically added to inhibit Facebook from recording the surroundings in the background. TikTok just does more of the same partly because they just have more audio and video data to work with. Remember how Uber showed how cool they can…
I don't understand the argument that we shouldn't ban tikTok because Meta/Google/etc.. also collect data. I would rather ban all three, but tikTok is in a whole different league based on how that data is used. The difference is that the CCP is literally on the board of bytedance and uses this information to arrest, imprison, and harvest the organs of political, ideological, religious, and other dissidents. Yes, the U…
If China really is as bad as all that (and I think it probably is) why are we wasting any time or energy on TikTok? It'd be a lot more effective to sanction China over those human rights abuses than to ban some toy app.
However, sanctioning them won't protect the millions (billions?) of international people who are being profiled though. It's a lot easier to identify, blackmail, impersonate, predict, locate, and anything else a government body might want to do to someone when you have all this information.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Part of the reason Zuck Bucks are viewed as partisan is because of the way in which they ended up being deployed. >On average, Biden counties received $2.85 per vote, compared to Trump counties that only received $0.89. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10090603/Mark-Zucke...
Correlation is not causation and Daily Mail is trash.
They seem to use their network of paparazzi/journalists to actually research facts on the ground. It is paid for by the fact that 95% of the content is indeed trash that sells.
But the 5% that isn't trash contains classic what/when/where/how style facts in great detail. For select topics like the trucker protests in Canada the Daily Mail is one of the best publications.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But couldn’t that simply be explained by GOP counties applying for less aid? So long as every county could receive funds equally, the fact some received less isn’t at all damning.
So if someone like elon musk or peter theil did something like this, they gave $419 million to a bunch of red states all while aggressively promoting trump, would you still claim it's "not damning"? This is an example of an extremely wealthy person influencing an election, plain and simple. It's odd to me that we're all just supposed to be ok with it.
Great news. The fact that a company from the unfriendly country collects biometrical data may finally provoke enough outrage that such data collection gets forbidden for everyone .
They say that we don't learn by knowing but by doing, and a significant part of the incentive to do is pain.
The tragic irony lies in the fact that apparently, it only takes about 80 years to forget the last horrors —approximately one maximized average lifespan, makes sense I guess… Though what a piss-poor historical-attention span. Or about as much to collectively resign sensitivity to horror, as in the case of CCP-led China (1949-now).
You know the problem with things that concerns everyone: everybody thinks somebody else is taking care of it; in the end nobody does.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the biometrics part, yes: Instagram never used biometrics, or at least they didn’t until this week when they started using it for an age verification process, but even then there’s no collection of biometrics in regular usage. Facebook used faceprints until 2021, when they shut down those features under regulatory pressure, but even while the feature was active it was off by default rather than a condition of usi…
They did use a video ID to capture my face from different angles, but it stopped after a few weeks.