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

Why we are suing the Administration

newsroom.tiktok.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 486 posts

Re: Why we are suing the Administration

#181

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

summerlight wrote: post #141
francesca wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you comply with China's laws you can operate there. These US companies just don't want to deal with that.

I saw this logic on HN frequently, but it's significantly flawed. It can be meaningful only if those two nations are completely independent to each other, which is a contradictory to the premise. Otherwise, there will be fairness escalations. To avoid such situation, modern global diplomacy and free trade already have developed a framework to minimize the friction and ensure a minimal level of fairness. The problem i…

China made massive concessions in order to join the WTO. It reduced tariffs from ~40% to ~3%, removed joint-venture restrictions from most sectors of the economy, broke up many state-owned enterprises, created a new intellectual property enforcement system out of nothing, and changed all sorts of laws that benefited domestic companies.

That's not to say that there are no legitimate complaints that foreign companies have, but the investment environment for foreign companies improved massively in China, and foreign companies have made huge returns on their investments. There's supposed to be a WTO mechanism for dealing with discrimination against foreign companies, though the Trump administration has put that mechanism out of action by blocking the appointment of judges to the WTO's appellate body.

Re: Why we are suing the Administration

#182

Post by dalbasal »

badRNG wrote: post #28

Regardless of what you think about TikTok, the banning of an app in the interest of "national security" is largely unprecedented. The jump from banning Huawei from building critical public infrastructure to banning an app that hasn't even conclusively been proven to behave in any uniquely dangerous ways seems to be an intense, unjustified escalation of this conflict. [1] You may disagree with me on the strict securit…

I agree.

Moreover, I think the whole thing kind of represents an adoption of the Chinese position. Since Deng ("let in fresh air, but keep out the flies"), China's attitude has been to liberalize economically but reject political rights.

Political rights like speech, affiliation, and such were seen as dangerous. Media, especially, was seen as something highly dangerous. Anything with potential to cause another tianmen is a "national security interest." They did not want what happened to the USSR to happen in the PRC.

The US is moving closer to this position. Espionage concerns may be a catalyst, but if you listen to legislators (eg congressional grillings) it's clear that content is their concern. Are you giving my opponent more eyeballs than me? Are you promoting left/right wing content? Why is this protest more prominent than that one?

The reality of modern politics is that online media is as important as CNN. Murdoch matters less than Zuck now. Politicians are highly sensitive to this.

There still hasn't been a politically (in the US) important media company that wasn't western. Tiktok has the potential to become one. US legislators seem as likely to allow a chinese CNN to succeed in the US and China is to allow CNN to succeed in China.

Re: Why we are suing the Administration

#183

Post by dade_ »

Udik wrote: post #167
dade_ wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand how someone can be on HN for 6 years and not already know this. Look up Five Eyes.

Five Eyes includes US, CA, UK, NZ and AU. Does it mean that German or French social networks are not allowed in the US? Conversely, should Italy or Russia ban US social networks? There are no absolute friends and absolute enemies. China was a good commercial partner of the US until a few years ago. Italy has been spied for decades by the CIA. The US wiretapped Germany's PM. Israel was caught installing spy mobile pho…

China - Not Five Eyes

Italy - Not Five Eyes

Germany - Not Five Eyes

Israel - Not Five Eyes

Notice a pattern?

Anyone new US foreign policy should also lookup the Munro Doctrine. Would have saved Maduro and the Venezuelans a great deal of suffering.

Re: Why we are suing the Administration

#184

Post by fvv »

kodablah wrote: post #173
fvv wrote: post #147

I think that free world should ban every company that comply with china censorship, here we are not talking about something like explicit content, or violence censorship which belong to cultural differences, here we are talking about not being put in jail because you say publicly that tibet should be free. or because you try to report abuse and suppression of the ruling class this type of free speech should be guaran…

> I think that free world should ban every company that comply with china censorship "I think the 'free' world should ban software and/or content". Condemn maybe, but it is scary to see such non-free actions encouraged against digital content.

being free does not mean that one must be completely helpless, freedom must be defended by those who want to suppress it otherwise it dies

Re: Why we are suing the Administration

#185

Post by iratewizard »

kodablah wrote: post #173
fvv wrote: post #147

I think that free world should ban every company that comply with china censorship, here we are not talking about something like explicit content, or violence censorship which belong to cultural differences, here we are talking about not being put in jail because you say publicly that tibet should be free. or because you try to report abuse and suppression of the ruling class this type of free speech should be guaran…

> I think that free world should ban every company that comply with china censorship "I think the 'free' world should ban software and/or content". Condemn maybe, but it is scary to see such non-free actions encouraged against digital content.

What do you think about the banning of Cuban cigars? Genuine question, not being an ass.

Re: Why we are suing the Administration

#186

Post by dalbasal »

ArchD wrote: post #116
badRNG wrote: post #28

Regardless of what you think about TikTok, the banning of an app in the interest of "national security" is largely unprecedented. The jump from banning Huawei from building critical public infrastructure to banning an app that hasn't even conclusively been proven to behave in any uniquely dangerous ways seems to be an intense, unjustified escalation of this conflict. [1] You may disagree with me on the strict securit…

Are you saying that CPC gets to ban Google, Facebook, Twitter & a ton of other non-Chinese online companies but the US government does not get to ban Chinese online companies, even in the name of fairness both in terms of trade and information flow? Chinese companies have to obey the CPC's orders that infringe users' privacy. Whether or not it is right for a country's government to spy on its citizens, the current ar…

Why does the CPC ban Google, Facebook, Twitter & a ton of other non-Chinese online companies?

They want control over media, especially political content. They want to make sure speech, affiliation and such is under their control. Are you saying the US should adopt this approach?

Trade fairness is a red herring.

Re: Why we are suing the Administration

#187

Post by kodablah »

fvv wrote: post #184
kodablah wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think that free world should ban every company that comply with china censorship "I think the 'free' world should ban software and/or content". Condemn maybe, but it is scary to see such non-free actions encouraged against digital content.

being free does not mean that one must be completely helpless, freedom must be defended by those who want to suppress it otherwise it dies

> freedom must be defended by those who want to suppress it

A Freudian typo to be sure, and sadly too representative of those pushing government software/content restrictions.

Re: Why we are suing the Administration

#188

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

Canada wrote: post #101

This is retaliation for China's unfair practices. It's not about propaganda, what videos are allowed or disallowed, or who might see which videos you watch. It's about the fact that valuable US tech companies aren't allowed to compete in China. If they were the trade deficit wouldn't nearly as bad. Now the Trump administration is hitting back. This is plainly and simply: Screw you, we're going to take something succe…

The US trade deficit has basically nothing to do with China's economic policies. It's driven by structural issues inside the United States, as well as the use of the US dollar as the international reserve currency. If the US were to end all trade with China, the trade deficit would just shift to other countries. Americans buy more than they produce, and China has little influence over that.

> valuable US tech companies aren't allowed to compete in China.

Facebook and Google can't operate in China because of censorship laws. Many US high-tech companies do a massive amount of business in China, including Apple, Qualcomm, Micron, AMD and Texas Instruments, to name just a few.

Re: Why we are suing the Administration

#189

Post by angio »

bdefore wrote: post #169

Couldn't the EU leverage the TikTok ordeal to make a similar case to force US-based social networks to divest ownership and restrict data hosting to locations outside of Five Eyes access? Given the revelations around espionage towards NATO allies it doesn't sound unreasonable.

At least someone in the EU is thinking about a digital firewall [0] to keep European citizens data within the EU.

[0] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/6487...

Re: Why we are suing the Administration

#190

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

Traster wrote: post #41
bootloop wrote: post #7

Why is the US always focusing on individual companies instead of working on laws to protect them from all companies invading the privacy of their citizens? Banning one player isn't going to help much in the long run I would think. Edit: I am an EU citizen if it matters.

The US political system is structured in such a way that it's very difficult to draft legislation and get it passed. You have to get a bill to pass a majority in the house, then (generally) get 60% in the senate, then get past the president's veto, and then implementation of that legislation will fall to a governmental organisation ultimately run by a political appointee who is appointed by the President and confirme…

This gridlock is a godsend.

Congress passed the PATRIOT ACT, multiple resolutions to invade foreign countries , almost passed SOPA until some people woke up, passed disaster debt ceiling increases routinely which will bankrupt this nation, passed increased regulation of healthcare markets with forces people to buy lamborgini coverage when a simple kia may do.

And in return the only positive i can say is we get some tax deductions which do not apply to heavily taxed, large urbanized states like CA, NY, IL.

No. Gridlock is good. Its the only thing putting a check on Congress from completely ruining this country.

See counter case: Switzerland. Complete gridlock. Massive check on congress via direct democracy. People argue about the zaniest litttle things. Yet people are freer here than in most other countries in the world

Post reply on HN