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

Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

congress.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 741 posts

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#171

Post by stronglikedan »

nbar1 wrote: post #168
withinboredom wrote: post #164

Maybe someone will scroll all the way down to this comment. Probably not. For half a decade, I have lived outside of the US, and I've watched as it has fallen to shit in slow motion. I make a decent chunk of income in USD and this terrifies me... but this. This move saddens me. There are only so many hours that congress has to make real decisions ... and this, this is what they spent their time on? Talking about how…

"might be" is not the concern, it's that they are.

And before that it was the TV, and before that it was the radio, and before that it was the newspaper, and before that it was the printing press, and so on. Nothing new under the sun.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#172

Post by mulmen »

charlieflowers wrote: post #20
gretch wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what the concern of the bill is and it's completely transparent. Just read the first 2 pages of the bill and you can see the concern is, in the words of the bill, a "foreign adversary" and their ability to "sabotage or subversion of the design, integrity, manufacturing, production, distribution, installation, operation, or maintenance of information and communications technology products and services in th…

The real concerns, in order of importance, are: 1. This is a way of getting memes to the masses that we (the US political establishment) can't fully control. 2. Meta and others are getting their asses kicked revenue-wise by Tik Tok. Like any business, they'd use anything they could to fight back. Turns out they can use China fear mongering, so they are. 3. (Added) Believe it or not, there's nationalistic pride here.…

> Surprising then that we don't ban Hondas and Toyotas, even though they're far superior to American cars

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax

We do ban some import vehicles. Specifically light trucks.

Harley-Davidson famously tried to get Japanese V-Twins banned for not leaking oil. Er, I mean, for “stealing their signature exhaust noise”.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#173

Post by harvey9 »

charlieflowers wrote: post #81
kirse wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actual #1. TikTok is banned in China, but in their similar app (Douyin) their kids are limited to 40min a day and restricted from a lot of the digital opium drip that US kids are receiving in infinite quantities. Sounds like it'd only be fair to follow suit if China itself is limiting the poisoning of their own citizens: https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2023/03/24/douyin-tiktok...

It is mind boggling, and at the same time not surprising at all, that China is enforcing a humane policy to protect its children when we are not willing to do the same.

USA and China have very different societies so the best you could expect in the former is an opt in facility for parents to limit time in an app. Much as I think these apps are the junk food of tech, I still prefer a less authoritarian state.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#174

Post by [deleted] »

lazyeye wrote: post #159
kelseyfrog wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because open markets and free speech are national values, not tit-for-tat teenage diplomatic drama. We're supposed to be better than that.

But its not open markets if one partner blocks all access to it's own market? In what other trade context would this scenario be acceptable? And how does giving access to an authoritarian regime, famous for controlling speech, promote free speech?

[deleted]

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#175

Post by harvey9 »

goldfeld wrote: post #116
charlieflowers wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is mind boggling, and at the same time not surprising at all, that China is enforcing a humane policy to protect its children when we are not willing to do the same.

It is also surprising to realize that China and the chinese actually think as a nation and have a sense of collectivism, whereas the US is to each their gun and their million dollars in the bank. China has always had this sense of being one thing, historically, and even the atrocious regimes, emperors, and dictators are always representative of a populace wish to centralize and control things fluidly and efficiently.…

That's a pretty superficial take on both countries.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#176

Post by throwaway4837 »

withinboredom wrote: post #164

Maybe someone will scroll all the way down to this comment. Probably not. For half a decade, I have lived outside of the US, and I've watched as it has fallen to shit in slow motion. I make a decent chunk of income in USD and this terrifies me... but this. This move saddens me. There are only so many hours that congress has to make real decisions ... and this, this is what they spent their time on? Talking about how…

Sadly, it has nothing to do with "talking about how 'kids' might be influenced by an algorithm", because if it did, they would be trying to ban Facebook, Instagram, and other social media services that have the exact same effect as TikTok on children.

This is really meant to be a punch in the fight against China. US government does not want any possibility of US citizens' data being in the hands of China and their questions to Chew made that clear. The narrative of child safety, for example the story about the kid who commit suicide because of their "for you" page, is being used as a kind of legal "pretext" so they can ban TikTok.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#177

Post by stronglikedan »

gretch wrote: post #7
humanistbot wrote: post #3

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?

That's not what the concern of the bill is and it's completely transparent. Just read the first 2 pages of the bill and you can see the concern is, in the words of the bill, a "foreign adversary" and their ability to "sabotage or subversion of the design, integrity, manufacturing, production, distribution, installation, operation, or maintenance of information and communications technology products and services in th…

I don't think it's specifically China. I think it's retribution because ByteDance won't open US offices and be beholden to the US government like other large corporations do. I think this is the US gov using them as an example of what happens when a corporation such as this dares not fall in line.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#178

Post by nbar1 »

stronglikedan wrote: post #171
nbar1 wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"might be" is not the concern, it's that they are.

And before that it was the TV, and before that it was the radio, and before that it was the newspaper, and before that it was the printing press, and so on. Nothing new under the sun.

The new thing under the sun is that the Chinese government has a heavy hand in TikTok.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#179

Post by [deleted] »

dymk wrote: post #56
primitivesuave wrote: post #54

A strategy doomed to failure: kick the far-right off Twitter so they can plan a revolution on Parler. Kick the QAnon people off Facebook so they can reorganize on Gab. All this will ever achieve is to scatter people into deeper and darker ideological echo chambers.

Good, they're doing more harm on Twitter and Facebook anyways

[deleted]

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#180

Post by quasarj »

hitpointdrew wrote: post #165
Entinel wrote: post #163

This bill is so awful it cannot be allowed to pass. It reminds me of the Patriot Act.

It's MUCH WORSE than the Patriot act. This bill is absolutely horrific. And calling it at bill to "ban TikTok" is extremely disingenuous as it egregiously goes well beyond that.

We need a good breakdown of it. I read it, but don't think I really understood.
Post reply on HN