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

TikTok to Sue U.S. over Ban

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 372 posts

Re: TikTok to Sue U.S. over Ban

#351

Post by ehsankia »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #76
ehsankia wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> While I think TikTok is a cesspool Is that referring to the content or the company itself? I don't see how it's any more of a cesspool than any other social platform. Twitter? Facebook? Reddit? Every sufficiently large platform is filled with a very wide range of content, from great to awful. As a company, I do agree they have shady practices, but again, don't most other social media apps such as Facebook and the g…

> I don't see how it's any more of a cesspool than any other social platform. It actually is uniquely bad. A disproportionate amount of the content consists of the sexualization of underage girls. The way the thing is set up, there is some kind of audio, someone does a thing (usually a dance), and then other people try to do the same thing to the same sound. The audio is generally nonsense. One of the currently popul…

I've been using TikTok for a year and I have not seen a single girl dance video in months. Not to say that those don't exist but there is far more content, yet people who've never used TikTok is just underage girls dancing to music. That's not too dissimilar than if I went to a subreddit dedicated to posting photos of barely legal girls, and claimed that's what reddit was all about. Similarly, Youtube also struggled with similar issues on its platform.

Re: TikTok to Sue U.S. over Ban

#352

Post by DetroitThrow »

baddox wrote: post #328
macintux wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Judges don’t answer to the government. They can be impeached, but that effectively never happens.

So they answer to no one?

We trust them to answer to SCOTUS, who we in turn trust to interpret the constitution that a majority of us have agreed to keep. Basically a group of people whose entire job is to interpret the actions in terms of law, constitution, and human rights - a marrying of theories on social contract, natural rights, and separation of powers that we've seen emulated (and improved upon) across the free world :)

Overall, I particularly enjoy this system over one that is accountable to a single entity.

Re: TikTok to Sue U.S. over Ban

#353

Post by burfog »

sbmthakur wrote: post #140
DetroitThrow wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The unique part of Chinese law is the lack of judicial supremacy or "rule of law". The party has supremacy over legal system interpretation as part of the '3 Supremes' order of precedence, with workers also coming ahead of the law. In the US system, there are still miscarriages of Justice, but there is judicial supremacy and separation of powers. The powers aren't as separated as say the French justice system, but mo…

> The party has supremacy over legal system interpretation as part of the '3 Supremes' order of precedence, with workers also coming ahead of the law. Very few people are aware about this. The party is supreme and institutions like PLA are answerable to the party, not to the people.

I always find the terminology strange.

If there is only one party permitted, and that one party is supreme, then how is that a party? It looks like government to me. Maybe the translation to English is just wrong. The "party" isn't a party by any reasonable definition.

The real parties would be factions within the so-called party. I don't know if they have names more descriptive than "Xi supporters" and "Xi opponents".

Re: TikTok to Sue U.S. over Ban

#354

Post by true_religion »

_8j50 wrote: post #316
true_religion wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Effectively no one treats computer software as simple information. But even if that were the case, you can ban sharing knowledge under obscenity clauses, national security clauses, or because it incite violence. TikTok is being banned as a threat to national security, because having your preeminent communications tool run by a foreign government is inane, unless you are or want to become a colony of that government.

We are not talking about revoking tiktok's business license. If I host the tiktok app on a server and someone downloads it, would we be breaking the law? So then it's not bytedance's activity you are restricting but americans'. You can't yell fire in a crowd but you can yell fire in a crowd if the crowd is consents to it and you can ban the provable intent to cause disruption but you can't ban the word "fire" from be…

Are you basically saying that TikTok the app isn’t being banned, but just made hard to find or use?

Re: TikTok to Sue U.S. over Ban

#355

Post by _8j50 »

true_religion wrote: post #354
_8j50 wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are not talking about revoking tiktok's business license. If I host the tiktok app on a server and someone downloads it, would we be breaking the law? So then it's not bytedance's activity you are restricting but americans'. You can't yell fire in a crowd but you can yell fire in a crowd if the crowd is consents to it and you can ban the provable intent to cause disruption but you can't ban the word "fire" from be…

Are you basically saying that TikTok the app isn’t being banned, but just made hard to find or use?

I am saying the business and finance of tiktok can be regulated but not the app itself. Appstores can ban it on their own but a law banning an app from an appstore is equivalent to a law banning a book from a library

Re: TikTok to Sue U.S. over Ban

#356

Post by wcoenen »

joubert wrote: post #216
wcoenen wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Amendments guarantee rights that you already have, countries can't give you rights. This statement confused me, probably because I'm not from the US and am missing some cultural dogma/context. But the way I think about it, "rights" are not encoded in the laws of physics. They are social constructs. Therefore different societies can come up with a different and even conflicting set of "rights".

> But the way I think about it, "rights" are not encoded in the laws of physics. They are social constructs. There's a long history of reasoning (i.e. logic) from first principles how to best establish communities, for example Rousseau's 1762 work, The Social Contract. Some key arguments that Rousseau expounds: * force does not create right; we are only obligated to obey legitimate powers * everyone is free (because…

> Do you not think that there are universal human rights?

I know attempts have been made to come up with "universal rights". But to my point, not everyone agrees with them. For example, the convention on children's rights has not been ratified by the US.

The poster I first responded to, has since clarified that he meant something like US law working as a blacklist of what is forbidden (as opposed to a whitelist of what is allowed). So the discussion about universal rights was a bit of a red herring, sorry.

Re: TikTok to Sue U.S. over Ban

#357

Post by Fjolsvith »

crazygringo wrote: post #296

Good. We have something called "due process" in the US, and the attempted TikTok ban violates it. Due process is a bedrock of American law. It means government officials can't just "do what they want" and make arbitrary decisions with specific targets -- which is exactly what the TikTok ban is. You want to ban TikTok? Great, you need a specific law from Congress that outlines under what circumstances companies may be…

Yeah, let that American "Due Process" show China how they should really be banning apps.

Re: TikTok to Sue U.S. over Ban

#358

Post by pinkfoot »

_vbdg wrote: post #349
freeone3000 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reasonable people can disagree about the limits of free speech, and when it becomes an attack on others. The American obsession with allowing Nazis and racists has done nothing to improve the lives of its people.

I think you're missing the point. An "attack on others" isn't something that most Americans should be limited, if you mean by attack what I believe you do (please clarify). I'm not sure why you think the power to limit speech can't be abused: even with strict protections, we've had awful majoritarian policies like the Sedition Act and McCarthyism. We protect everyone, Nazis and racists included, because if we give th…

> We protect everyone.

Oh please… 28 US states have actual legislation to prohibit state offices from doing business with companies or individuals that even threaten to boycott Israel.

Not far from how NBA employees get censored by China.

And there is more to come…

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Anti-Boycott_Act

Re: TikTok to Sue U.S. over Ban

#359

Post by boomboomsubban »

wcoenen wrote: post #356
joubert wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But the way I think about it, "rights" are not encoded in the laws of physics. They are social constructs. There's a long history of reasoning (i.e. logic) from first principles how to best establish communities, for example Rousseau's 1762 work, The Social Contract. Some key arguments that Rousseau expounds: * force does not create right; we are only obligated to obey legitimate powers * everyone is free (because…

> Do you not think that there are universal human rights? I know attempts have been made to come up with "universal rights". But to my point, not everyone agrees with them. For example, the convention on children's rights has not been ratified by the US. The poster I first responded to, has since clarified that he meant something like US law working as a blacklist of what is forbidden (as opposed to a whitelist of wh…

I said nothing like that, it has nothing to do with US law, but I also don't think universal rights exist in the way you two are discussing. On a deserted island with no government, you still have the right to free speech without anyone giving it to you.

Re: TikTok to Sue U.S. over Ban

#360

Post by amaccuish »

jariel wrote: post #335
throw44532 wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They can. They just need to comply with China’s data and censorship laws. It’s why Microsoft and Apple are available in China.

Then it's not a level playing field, obviously.

ahh, sorry, I forgot the whole world must have the exact same laws as the US, otherwise it's "unfair"
Post reply on HN