Live data from Hacker News

TikTok goes dark in the US

techcrunch.com

451–460 of 1001 posts

Re: TikTok goes dark in the US

#452

A point I think most people don’t understand is that the government interest in TikTok has little to do with exploiting user data per se, a lot of other companies do that. The issue is that TikTok is somewhat unique in being aggressively weaponized in currently very active “grey zone” conflicts. This has been an open secret in national security circles but the average person on the street has no idea what a grey zone…

This. I suggest to read Unrestricted Warfare to understand more on how TikTok (or FB, X, Instagram and such) can be used as tools in modern conflict.

Brexit and Trump #1 would've not happened without the likes of Cambridge analytica targeting undecided voters with precision.

Social media manipulation has already been effective.

Re: TikTok goes dark in the US

#453

Can someone please explain to me, why it is illegal to publish biased media? Please relate your answer to US native broadcasters like Fox News. The public discourse in the US appears very distorted. The rececently elected legislative heavily tampers with the executive/judicative and somehow this is stil democratic? IMO the tiktok ban is only about media control, no morale or legality, just political power and somehow…

> Can someone please explain to me, why it is illegal to publish biased media? You have been misinformed, it is not illegal to publish biased media. > The rececently elected legislative heavily tampers with the executive/judicative and somehow this is stil democratic. What are you trying to say? The majority passes something, and the Supreme Court chose to allow it to continue. > IMO the tiktok ban is only about medi…

Thanks for the answer but i am still not satisfied.

So, the problem seems to be _foreign_ biased media and not biased media in general. General media bias could be made punishable too but this would take away influencial powers.

> a content-neutral conditional ban.

So TikToks content or bias is irrelevant? The only thing left is the adversarial ownership, which is ban worthy. How?

Re: TikTok goes dark in the US

#454

A point I think most people don’t understand is that the government interest in TikTok has little to do with exploiting user data per se, a lot of other companies do that. The issue is that TikTok is somewhat unique in being aggressively weaponized in currently very active “grey zone” conflicts. This has been an open secret in national security circles but the average person on the street has no idea what a grey zone…

Other ways [0] to think about "grey zone" conflict:

  cold-war (not an obsolete term)

  ambient non-linear conflict

  cyberwar

  business 

[0] https://cybershow.uk/blog/posts/after-war/

Re: TikTok goes dark in the US

#455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The issue is that TikTok is somewhat unique in being aggressively weaponized in currently very active “grey zone” conflicts. That has been happening since time immemorial. What is actually the issue is that for the first time ever in the post-WW2 Pax Americana era, media is being weaponized by a powerful non-American state (China). America does through Facebook, Mysterious Twitter X, Reddit, CNN, Fox News, PBS, et a…

Didn't the USSR have a pretty good "foreign relations" propaganda team?

Has.

Re: TikTok goes dark in the US

#456
post #289
post #257

Unreal. Land of Freedom bans Social Media app that runs on US servers, on its own terms, with censorship teams staffed by dozens of ex-US State officials[1]. Amazing that Congress will see bipartisan action on this issue before any of the other much more important issues. It absolutely destroys criticisms of China banning Facebook, etc. 1. https://www.mintpressnews.com/tiktok-chinese-trojan-horse-ru...

it's a trade war response to china's long history of walling non-chinese apps off from their billion-odd-user market while happily collecting users, data, and ad revenue from their own apps in other countries. if china removes all limitations on US tech platforms and ceases exploiting our open-by-default policy, we can talk lifting restrictions. until then, all chinese tech services should be banned. basically china'…

This is almost certainly true. What I find most offensive is the total unwillingness of elected politicians of both parties to admit that protectionism is the real reason for the ban. Our politicians believe we are stupid.

Re: TikTok goes dark in the US

#459

It's a shame that it's come to this. I feel that all arguments that TikTok is unhealthy or spyware and bad for our general public are valid, but the same arguments also apply to Instagram/Twitter/Whatever. Rather than have some sort of further regulation for what data any application can collect and present to Americans, we've just brought the hammer down on the millions of people that use this application for their…

I'm going to quote a CBS News article here because I don't feel Congress' arguments in favor of banning TikTok are being well represented. You can agree with them or disagree with them but everyone should at least understand them accurately. TLDR TikTok is not comparable to the other services you mentioned because ByteDance is required to comply with Chinese intelligence, and China has made many public statements in…

All I've seen since TikTok boomed in US is that public opinion has been shaped very negatively on China by the hawkish tone in Washington.

I see zero, little evidence that TikTok brought any particular sympathy to China.

Nor I've seen a single study that has demonstrated that TikTok is any more biased than other socials. In fact it was even less than some (such as Twitter).

Re: TikTok goes dark in the US

#460
post #148

It's a shame that it's come to this. I feel that all arguments that TikTok is unhealthy or spyware and bad for our general public are valid, but the same arguments also apply to Instagram/Twitter/Whatever. Rather than have some sort of further regulation for what data any application can collect and present to Americans, we've just brought the hammer down on the millions of people that use this application for their…

None of those arguments are the salient one, which is that a geopolitical adversary has control over a major influence vector on US public opinion. They could simply have divested.

Then why does the law require divesting to only a US owner instead of also allowing NATO or major non-NATO allies as owners?

Personally, I think it’s a bit of both. There’s definitely concern about Chinese control but it has also been seen as a business opportunity.

Post reply on HN