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

TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 723 posts

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#551

Post by s3r3nity »

billfruit wrote: post #195

As someone from the third world this leaves a very bad feeling if it happens. I do expect it runs into legal hurdles before that. Neither Apple nor Google have found TikTok problematic enough to delist them from their app stores. Neither is there charges that TikTok may have broken US laws. Banning something which hasn't broken US laws, on arbitrary grounds shouldn't be possible. The President shouldn't have authorit…

China doesn't allow western companies to operate freely in their country, so why should US shoulder the blame here?

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#552

Post by generatorguy »

peacefulhat wrote: post #276
RavlaAlvar wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If US successfully force China to open market, that would be a win for everyone. Of course though, this situation would only occur in fantasy land.

Making the US less open will not make China more open.

What if the US and allies are Less open to China, and offer to me more open again if China also is more open?

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#553

Post by scoot_718 »

billfruit wrote: post #195

As someone from the third world this leaves a very bad feeling if it happens. I do expect it runs into legal hurdles before that. Neither Apple nor Google have found TikTok problematic enough to delist them from their app stores. Neither is there charges that TikTok may have broken US laws. Banning something which hasn't broken US laws, on arbitrary grounds shouldn't be possible. The President shouldn't have authorit…

> Banning something which hasn't broken US laws, on arbitrary grounds shouldn't be possible.

Of course it should. They control their store fronts. This is an extremist position you are taking.

> Also dictating which apps an individual can install/not install shouldn't be the job of the Federal Government.

They aren't doing that. Install the app from an APK if you care so much.

Protecting their citizens from hostile state actors is very much in their purview and mandate.

> At this point US is seemingly acting like a dictatorship with very less transparency.

Nonsense. TikTok isn't a US citizen. And they need to obey regulations. Ensuring US infrastructure and the private data of their citizens is protected is the sort of thing a democracy does.

> Chinese policy seems to have not significantly changed in the last 5 years towards the US,

I agree actually. They've been pulling this shit for more than a decade now. War on all fronts except military. I'm glad the world is starting to wake up to it.

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#554

Post by throwaway69123 »

flywheel wrote: post #370
bladegash wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A straight forward argument that comes to my mind is TikTok being used in the manner Cambridge Analytica used Facebook. Except in this case, it is being done by a State sponsored entity with vast resources (monetarily and people-wise). Further, instead of it being used to help a candidate become elected, it's purpose would be to influence foreign opinions of China/the PRC. That doesn't sound implausible to me.

My wife is on TikTok for at least an hour a night if not more - I've never once seen or heard anything pro-china or anything that would otherwise influence her opinion about China. Not once. It's all content from US social media whores.

You are focused on outputs what about inputs?

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#555

Post by throwaway69123 »

Wingman4l7 wrote: post #536
billfruit wrote: post #195

As someone from the third world this leaves a very bad feeling if it happens. I do expect it runs into legal hurdles before that. Neither Apple nor Google have found TikTok problematic enough to delist them from their app stores. Neither is there charges that TikTok may have broken US laws. Banning something which hasn't broken US laws, on arbitrary grounds shouldn't be possible. The President shouldn't have authorit…

> Chinese policy seems to have not significantly changed in the last 5 years towards the US, but on the other hand US seemed ever more keen and eger to pursue a hostile attitude towards China. Years of concentrated industrial espionage from China against US companies says otherwise.

They are technically correct the hostile policy hasnt changed in the last 5 years.

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#556

Post by DanielBMarkham »

billfruit wrote: post #195

As someone from the third world this leaves a very bad feeling if it happens. I do expect it runs into legal hurdles before that. Neither Apple nor Google have found TikTok problematic enough to delist them from their app stores. Neither is there charges that TikTok may have broken US laws. Banning something which hasn't broken US laws, on arbitrary grounds shouldn't be possible. The President shouldn't have authorit…

Looks like the bullet list of things we might complain about, almost randomly presented.

Since there's no reasoning presented, I guess there's no point engaging?

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#558

Post by ClumsyPilot »

elSidCampeador wrote: post #525
hhsuey wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can be tough on China without becoming China. Honest question. Do you know how this could be done? I'm not too familiar with foreign affairs.

> You can be tough on China without becoming China. Sovereign nations have always reserved the right to decide what is allowed on their shores. That they disallow an entity from operating on their shores does not mean that they have "become China".

You are conflating rule of law and sovereignty.

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#559

Post by arrosenberg »

hhsuey wrote: post #460
arrosenberg wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because we believe in the free market and they believe in a controlled market? We pay lip service to the free market, but in practice we believe in controlled, privately owned markets and China believes in controlled, state owned markets.

Just randomly thinking out loud: Is it possible to stop privately owned markets without the state having more control? I suppose the concern is with large private corporations, as opposed to smaller to medium sized businesses. I think that's what a lot of Democrats want to do, but I often associate them with bigger government. I know very little about politics though.

Sure, by enacting strict laws that forbid individual competitors from exceeding some amount of market share or forming conglomerates. Corporate breakups are self-executing. No compliance bureaucracy required, just investigators and lawyers. The government doesn't acquire the power to pick winners and losers, they indifferently breakup any player who gets big enough to distort the market or centralize too much power.

Re: TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U.S. deal – sources

#560

Post by DarthGhandi »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #277
billfruit wrote: post #195

As someone from the third world this leaves a very bad feeling if it happens. I do expect it runs into legal hurdles before that. Neither Apple nor Google have found TikTok problematic enough to delist them from their app stores. Neither is there charges that TikTok may have broken US laws. Banning something which hasn't broken US laws, on arbitrary grounds shouldn't be possible. The President shouldn't have authorit…

Not that it justifies our behavior, but I can’t help but cringe a bit when considering how China locks American companies out of its market but expects better access for Chinese companies in the American market. America-Chinese relations started going downhill in 2009 when China thought it prudent to start blocking most Americans services, America just took a decade to follow up with similar bad behavior.

Which companies are locked out? Last I looked China is packed full of American companies, far moreso than the other way around. Apple, Walmart, Nike, Coke(61% marketshare), P&G, KFC, McDonald's, GE, GM, Boeing (50% marketshare), MS (99% marketshare) all make billions each year on the mainland, many make more there than in the US.

It's frankly quite disturbing how something so completely wrong constantly ends up the top of HN comments on these tiktok threads lately. 2 of the top 3 comments say this and it's not true whatsoever. It's just plain jingoism.

Since you've raised the issue can I as an Australian, sell my lamb to US consumers unhindered? We have a free trade agreement, take a guess about our market access in certain farming sectors? Even with shipping I can sell for far better prices than domestic farmers so your government sets up tariffs and sanctions to stop that happening. Ask some South American corn farmers about their market access too while this topic is hot :)

The US is so blatantly hypocritical and that's the real "cringe" here. The ultra-nationalist sentiment in this place is laughable.

Tiktok was a risk and I don't really have much of a problem with the choices made but the online justifications are unreal to listen to.

Post reply on HN