Best case scenario Tiktok is just wasting people’s time.
Why we are suing the Administration
201–210 of 486 posts
Re: Why we are suing the Administration
#202I 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…
Hate to say it, but the terrific first amendment in the US only applies to the government. Companies and individuals can kick you out for saying things they dont like.
There are laws against certain kinds of discrimination by companies, but those are not the first amendment.
Just wanted to clarify that so we dont pretend companies are upholding constitutional rights on a regional basis. They are not accountable to it anywhere.
Re: Why we are suing the Administration
#203I 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…
My opinion is that the only realistic solution is a broad offering of many many social media apps, so that people can choose between them.
Wasn't this already "attempted" through the natural mechanics of the free market? Social media seems to tend toward monopoly (or at least oligopoly) due to the extreme realization of the network effect in this industry.
Here is a sampling attempts (though I'm sure the graveyard has hundreds if not thousands of members): Friendster, DailyBooth, FriendFeed, Google Buzz, Meerkat, Yik Yak, Vine, Google Plus, MySpace, Path, Orkut, ConnectU, ...
Re: Why we are suing the Administration
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the subtext is, "It is OK for companies to invade the privacy of US citizens, so long the companies' own countries is also on the US side as well".
> so long the companies' own countries is also on the US side as well The US side of what? What does it mean to be on the US side?
I don't think this question deserves the downvotes, because it's not easily answered in a clear fashion. It's a question that leads to many others.
We know there is geopolitical maneuvering by different countries to improve their standing on the world stage, politically and/or economically, and that includes how they engage on business and technology. The great firewall was not for nothing. Same with fights over 5G or who can operate where, data privacy laws, etc.
OTOH, it's not clear exactly what's at stake when there's a dispute over control of tiktok. Are the worlds governments competing over data sources they could tap to make weaponizable models of societal function? Are they just competing for ownership of emerging markets to help their economies? Does all this amount to a pissing match between the worlds elites? Or are ideological differences sufficient to cause wildly different outcomes for humanity, especially the little folks, depending on who gets the upper hand?
Re: Why we are suing the Administration
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
France and Germany are not 65% of the EU population, not even after Brexit. More like 33%.
You're backwards. The topic is talking about how 65% of population is required to pass. If France and Germany have 33%, as you say, then every single other country combined is 67%. They would then have enough population to block legislation together in most cases
Well, they might need one or two of the small countries, but if you are realistic, this is never an issue.
Re: Why we are suing the Administration
#206Zuck s been busy fighting Tiktok with tooth n nail. He knows he lost his prime users to Tiktok. No youngsters use FB anymore. But FB can do this in India and its ok ? https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-executive-supported-in...
Zuck probably did not have any to do with Tiktok getting banned in India. The current border conflict between India and China provided the impetus to getting it banned in India.
Re: Why we are suing the Administration
#207I 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…
[deleted]
Re: Why we are suing the Administration
#208I 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…
Hate to say it, but the terrific first amendment in the US only applies to the government. Companies and individuals can kick you out for saying things they dont like. There are laws against certain kinds of discrimination by companies, but those are not the first amendment. Just wanted to clarify that so we dont pretend companies are upholding constitutional rights on a regional basis. They are not accountable to it…
Congress and state legislatures can and should fix this.
Re: Why we are suing the Administration
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, this isn't a perspective I've seen anyone elucidate, and I don't have any evidence for it, but my gut says that it's a corrupt play intended to force sale/some other tawdry goal. Or maybe they just want to get back at those "tiktok teens."
The crazy thing is, I'd actually support real action on China. The CCP are a problem I feel we have been ignoring for too long. Instead, everything trump has done has been carefully designed NOT to actually change anything except to produce headlines in both countries and try to make more people indebted or reliant on his administration and strengthen the hand of the CCP. Of course, we're now deep into my opinions :)
"real action" on China would require the hard work of making the case to the 100m American TT users, building a bipartisan consensus, and passing a bill.
The current administration has no intention of doing any of that. Attemping to rule by decree is easier and makes for immediate headlines. By the time the executive order gets thrown out in court, plenty of political hay has been made among the party faithful.
And when the order does get thrown out in court, the administration blames 'activist judges' instead of the merits of their own case.
Re: Why we are suing the Administration
#210Interesting article in Bloomberg just now: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-01/bytedance... . The kicker is at the end: “He thought that by making a promise to follow international standards or rules he would be able to escape the regulation or the kind of pressure from the American government,” said Ding. “But I think now he realizes he might have been wrong and that if he doesn’t want to sell the com…
Exactly. My understanding is that ByteDance has tried to maintain some distance with the Chinese government in the past, but this pressure from the US essentially forces it to reverse course. It's antithetical to the US's purported objective of promoting a more liberalized market economy in China (though I suppose that was never something this administration really cared about).
Maybe it's a next level play the more hardline authoritarian China becomes the easier it is to rally the domestic population to be anti-Chinese in all matters. Remember when terrorists created sectarian violence in Iraq for the sole purpose of inciting ethnic conflict?
I wouldn't have believed it was possible even 5 years ago in the U.S. but now who knows.