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

Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

congress.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 741 posts

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#61

Post by alephnerd »

freewizard wrote: post #55

(10) ICTS COVERED HOLDING ENTITY.—The term “ICTS covered holding entity” means any entity that— (A) owns, controls, or manages information and communications technology products or services; and (B) (i) has not less than 1,000,000 United States-based annual active users at any point during the year period preceding the date on which the covered holding is referred to the President; or (ii) for which more than 1,000,0…

Good. If American software companies face anti-competitive restrictions on accessing the Chinese market, then we may as well do the same. Paradox of Tolerance and whatnot.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#62

Post by abeppu »

What I don't get is why we didn't pursue something in the WTO years ago.

China doesn't allow FB, Insta, Twitter, etc to operate in its market, but its companies can provide such a service to US customers? Is that not protectionism?

If we're afraid that China will use TikTok to push their propaganda in the US, we should be appropriately concerned that banning a platform to stop targeted speech is in conflict with our own norms around free speech. But instead insisting that TikTok can only operate in the US if FB/Snap/Twitter can operate in China on equal terms seems like it would be more in line with our rhetoric around wanting a rules-based international order, and freedom of both trade and speech under most circumstances.

If western social media companies were able to offer their services in China, their fear of our propaganda would be much worse than our fear of theirs.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#63

Post by alephnerd »

spiderice wrote: post #48
sct202 wrote: post #36

I'm fine if TikTok gets banned, but I feel like Facebook and all the other social media incumbents owe Americans a bunch of money for their biggest competition being banned.

> I'm fine if TikTok gets banned How are so many people (especially on HN) fine with this? Haven't we criticized "The Great Firewall of China" for literally decades? How is this not the start of that? Genuine question. This ban seems to set horrible precedent to me. Bet everyones "coolness" with it makes me think I'm not understanding something.

Depends on the "We"

I personally was deep into digital privacy back in grade school and college when the Arab Spring began, but my own thinking shifted after learning about and working with people who blue teamed incidents like Operation Aurora and Titan Rain, as well as censorship of FB and Whatsapp in the PRC following unrest in East Turkestan in 2009.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#65

Post by jml7c5 »

Gigachad wrote: post #25
charlieflowers wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real concerns, in order of importance, are: 1. This is a way of getting memes to the masses that we (the US political establishment) can't fully control. 2. Meta and others are getting their asses kicked revenue-wise by Tik Tok. Like any business, they'd use anything they could to fight back. Turns out they can use China fear mongering, so they are. 3. (Added) Believe it or not, there's nationalistic pride here.…

When the memes involve destroying the school bathrooms and stealing cars. It's probably worth considering what control is had over it.

Those aren't really relevant to the topic of Chinese ownership, unless you believe the government told TikTok to actively promote those videos. The stupid destruction trends seem organic to me, and did not require CCP interference.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#66

Post by kirse »

charlieflowers wrote: post #20
gretch wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what the concern of the bill is and it's completely transparent. Just read the first 2 pages of the bill and you can see the concern is, in the words of the bill, a "foreign adversary" and their ability to "sabotage or subversion of the design, integrity, manufacturing, production, distribution, installation, operation, or maintenance of information and communications technology products and services in th…

The real concerns, in order of importance, are: 1. This is a way of getting memes to the masses that we (the US political establishment) can't fully control. 2. Meta and others are getting their asses kicked revenue-wise by Tik Tok. Like any business, they'd use anything they could to fight back. Turns out they can use China fear mongering, so they are. 3. (Added) Believe it or not, there's nationalistic pride here.…

Actual #1. TikTok is banned in China, but in their similar app (Douyin) their kids are limited to 40min a day and restricted from a lot of the digital opium drip that US kids are receiving in infinite quantities. Sounds like it'd only be fair to follow suit if China itself is limiting the poisoning of their own citizens:

https://www.cnn.com/videos/business/2023/03/24/douyin-tiktok...

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#67

Post by alephnerd »

abeppu wrote: post #62

What I don't get is why we didn't pursue something in the WTO years ago. China doesn't allow FB, Insta, Twitter, etc to operate in its market, but its companies can provide such a service to US customers? Is that not protectionism? If we're afraid that China will use TikTok to push their propaganda in the US, we should be appropriately concerned that banning a platform to stop targeted speech is in conflict with our…

PRC has "developing nation" status in the WTO. This allows the PRC to get special and differential treatment in a number of IP and general trade related agreements.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#68

Post by dragontamer »

vkou wrote: post #50
holler wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China has banned nearly all US social networks already so is this really surprising given the current status quo?

If we're using China as a role model for our information hygiene, then I think it's fair to say that the free speech experiment that some liberal democracies have practiced over the past few centuries has ran its course, and can be considered a failure. Pack it up, folks, as it turns out, there are some things that are too dangerous to let the public hear.

I think you need to study WW2 a little bit more. The Office of Censorship opening up letters to destroy pro-Nazi sentiment, and the Office of War Information buying up Disney Cartoons to show Donald Duck / Popeye / etc. as a Navy Sailor and encourage us to buy War Bonds through very overt propaganda.

Free Speech comes and goes in the USA. We tend to lean towards the freer-side of things, but if we need to, we clamp down on it to meet our other goals.

-----

WW2 is hardly an outlier either. WW1 had Espionage Act of 1917, Civil War didn't even have a law, Censorship and seizure of printing presses was just so common. Pre-Civil War, the Postmaster General of slave states commonly censored pamphlets from abolitionists. I mean, the "Alien and Sedition Acts" were passed within a year or two of the Bill of Rights, allowing the President to arrest various members of the press in the 1780s. Etc. etc. This stuff has been going on since the dawn of the USA as a country.

Book burnings and other such events were also widespread in the USA throughout our history... and even have legal precedent like the Comstock laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comstock_laws

IMO, we've gone too far into the free-speech side of becoming absolutely idiots about the subject in recent years and all of us can benefit from researching the actual history of the USA.

Free Speech, both opening up, and restricting it, has its uses. And if you're a student of history, you'll be able to feel the ebbs and flows of this subject throughout time.

-----------

Censorship is a tool. A tool best used rarely, maybe only a few times a century. But I unfortunately think we're coming to the point where we need to start using it within this decade or so. And no, not for the stupid AP African American class crap. I mean for the part that matters right now, the China-Taiwan conflict that is obviously brewing up.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#69

Post by doctor_eval »

ot wrote: post #47
charlieflowers wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real concerns, in order of importance, are: 1. This is a way of getting memes to the masses that we (the US political establishment) can't fully control. 2. Meta and others are getting their asses kicked revenue-wise by Tik Tok. Like any business, they'd use anything they could to fight back. Turns out they can use China fear mongering, so they are. 3. (Added) Believe it or not, there's nationalistic pride here.…

Do you have a reference for point 2?

FB has the motive and means to promote xenophobia, and has repeatedly shown willingness to do whatever it takes to make a profit.

So while I think it’s fair to ask for a reference, it is prudent to assume it’s happening, unless proven otherwise.

They don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#70

Post by konfusinomicon »

politics aside and taking into consideration that all of our governments suck in their own special ways...it pains me greatly that China is considered an adversary with the US..and Russia too..what good could come to the world if the three had a healthy relationship and pooled our greatest minds and resources toward the betterment of mankind.
Post reply on HN