Live data from Hacker News

Trump says he will ban TikTok through executive action

cnbc.com

631–640 of 694 posts

Re: Trump says he will ban TikTok through executive action

#631
post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would suggest that “media company” is a westernized, capitalist, and therefore inaccurate description of what Bytedance is. It, like all other media in China, is an extension of the state. I am not arguing whether or not the US government has the right to ban TikTok, I am explaining what the threats are. Do not conflate the two and confuse the conversation. It is absolutely possible that this is a threat and we can…

> Bytedance was ordered to suspend its most popular product, a news-aggregator app called Jinri Toutiao (Today’s Headlines). The next day, regulators yanked Neihan Duanzi, the company’s social-media platform, where users share jokes and videos. If ByteDance really was an extension of the state, surely they wouldn't even have launched a product that violates the regulations of the state they're supposedly an extension…

You’re missing the parent’s point, which is that they will jump when the government tells them to.

Re: Trump says he will ban TikTok through executive action

#632
post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if it's a big hoax and I'm only protecting myself from corporate surveillance and not state surveillance too??

So you have no real evidence, got it.

https://cs.brown.edu/courses/csci1800/sources/2017_PRC_Natio.... "Article 7 Any organization or citizen shall support, assist and cooperate with the state intelligence work in accordance with the law, and keep the secrets of the national intelligence work known to the public. The State protects individuals and organizations that support, assist and cooperate with national intelligence work."

Re: Trump says he will ban TikTok through executive action

#633
post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But this measure isn't bring contemplated from that motive, it appears, the whole narrative is about some perceived threats to national security, which most analysts think is over hyped and only 'theoritical'.

The motive is teens pranked Trump's Tulsa rally, using TikTok.

I cannot believe that with over 500 bewildered comments yours is the only one to make this obvious connection. I have a difficult time forming any other conclusion than yours. I agree that an executive order would be a direct response to TikTok users trolling him at Tulsa.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. These TikTok users already won round 1 (Tulsa) and this would mean war.

Re: Trump says he will ban TikTok through executive action

#634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think US has killed millions of civilians in living memory. Further, I think there’s a vast moral difference between civilians dying over the course of war (especially when enemy combatants deliberately hide among civilians and the difficulty of perfectly controlling an enormous army of soldiers) and waging an ideological campaign on one’s own citizens. Dropping the atomic bombs on Japan was awful, but I can…

As I said, I don't view them as morally equivalent, just not as far apart as I'd like them to be and people who experienced i.e. [1] probably view the U.S. as much worse, if you take the Korean War, Vietnam, Latin America, The Middle East, that's millions of civilians killed within living memory. 2003 Iraq alone is ~200,000, (up to 1mil per some), and that's discounting the first Gulf War or the sanctions following i…

> As for people dying due to lack of healthcare and you not counting it, if we're going to attribute the evils of CCP to "communism", why discount deaths attributable to "capitalism" so easily?

Because the deaths aren’t attributable to capitalism. Capitalism has increased longevity all over the world, including in China. In China, it not only made medical advancements available to the Chinese, but China’s recent prosperity (and the consequent improvements in health outcomes) is directly attributable to its slide toward capitalism. By contrast, the policies of mass murder and starvation during the “Great Leap Forward” were a massive regression in Chinese outcomes. Of course, all of this misses the point that even if the outcomes were exactly the same in both countries, a bad outcome due to malice is still morally worse than the same outcome due to incompetence. Failing to provide top notch healthcare to a country’s citizens is a much less grave offense than outright murdering millions of citizens to protect or extend one’s political power. America’s postwar faults aren’t comparable to those of China’s, and while I understand and appreciate your goal of trying to draw attention to America’s own faults, trying to make the comparison with China has the opposite effect. The US is already incomparably better than China, but we shouldn’t settle is the argument you ought to be making, IMO.

Re: Trump says he will ban TikTok through executive action

#635
post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hah! Why doesn't the US ban the Nazi party or the KKK if it really cares about the Paradox of tolerance?

Because neither are numerous enough so as to constitute a legitimate threat. If we started seeing local governments having openly KKK or neo-Nazi majorities, the freedom of speech balance would substantially alter. First amendment rights in the US are typically circumscribed only via a requirement to show actual, existential harm.

The problem is that historically this has been the case only when it was essentially too late.

Death by a thousand cuts:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creeping_normality

Re: Trump says he will ban TikTok through executive action

#636

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hah! Why doesn't the US ban the Nazi party or the KKK if it really cares about the Paradox of tolerance?

We fought a war against the Nazis, with millions dead, to end fascism. We'd (hopefully) do it again if it were necessary. It's really off the mark to criticize the US for not having done enough against Nazis! Forget banning, we invaded and killed those fuckers.

This is literal Gestapo as we learned it during history class in 1990s Austria:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-race-portland-valo...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestapo#Suppression_of_resista...

Re: Trump says he will ban TikTok through executive action

#637

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has been the case since the launch of the App Store. It’s not new. When uploading an app to Apple App Store, you have to do disclosures about cryptography exports.

While I still vehemently believe the crypto export laws are a stinking pile of 1st Amendment violation, we're talking about code import here, and I don't think there's legislative precedent (and certainly not executive ) to enact something like this.

This has happened multiple times before. The forced selling of Grindr back to US ownership from Chinese ownership was the most recent example.

Re: Trump says he will ban TikTok through executive action

#638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think there is infrastructure in place in the US to prevent access to an IP space.

Shouldn’t this be a very basic thing to do network wise?

For an individual ISP, yeah. But there are thousands across the US and what I think doesn’t exist is a central list they all look at for IPs to block.

Re: Trump says he will ban TikTok through executive action

#639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said, I don't view them as morally equivalent, just not as far apart as I'd like them to be and people who experienced i.e. [1] probably view the U.S. as much worse, if you take the Korean War, Vietnam, Latin America, The Middle East, that's millions of civilians killed within living memory. 2003 Iraq alone is ~200,000, (up to 1mil per some), and that's discounting the first Gulf War or the sanctions following i…

> As for people dying due to lack of healthcare and you not counting it, if we're going to attribute the evils of CCP to "communism", why discount deaths attributable to "capitalism" so easily? Because the deaths aren’t attributable to capitalism. Capitalism has increased longevity all over the world, including in China. In China, it not only made medical advancements available to the Chinese, but China’s recent pros…

> Failing to provide top notch healthcare to a country’s citizens is a much less grave offense than outright murdering millions of citizens to protect or extend one’s political power.

It's fair to say it's not as bad as doing it for political power, but it's worth noting that in the U.S. aprox. 45000 people a year die due to lack of adequate healthcare. Over the past 4-6 decades, it indeed ads up to millions dead.

This state of things is directly attributable to law makers being lobbied by corporate interests. Practically every other developed nation has some form of universal healthcare. We can add a large number of those that died from the current pandemic, since quite visibly the countries with universal healthcare did much better.

Your argument essentially seems to be that it's way better for private interests to influence public policy in a negative way than having the state enacting terrible policies by itself.

I agree that it makes it more distributed, but still terrible. And yes, it is capitalism. You cannot just take the good parts and disregard the bad.

> I understand and appreciate your goal of trying to draw attention to America’s own faults, trying to make the comparison with China has the opposite effect. The US is already incomparably better than China.

This is my main issue with your argument. Sure, China is still worse, I acknowledge that, my argument is that the U.S. is not as much better as many, including you, probably think.

You have a much more direct impact on the U.S. and making it better than you have on China. Diluting yourself into thinking the U.S. is already essentially "the good guys" prevents you from having the will to actively improve it and over time leads to the fact of it being not as far from China as you'd like.

The world already thinks of America as the bigger threat to world peace, you can keep telling yourself what you want, but the rest of the world has a much less rosy picture of the U.S. than you'd think and the best way to keep China from "taking over" is not to ban TikTok but to work hard to improve that image.

Re: Trump says he will ban TikTok through executive action

#640

Not US citizen here. Can someone explain how in a democracy the chief executive can singlehandedly decide to ban a media only a few month before elections? I can't make any sense of that, it seems wrong at so many levels...

The short answer is that he can't. The president has no power to ban TikTok. The president also has no control over how the app is distributed or its connectivity. He can say whatever he wants, and he can strongarm the agencies he has some control over (like the FCC), but there's simply no mechanism by which a ban can be enforced, legal or technical. Unless Google and Apple decide to voluntarily remove it from their…

> The short answer is that he can't.

It depends upon what you mean by "can't."

If you mean legal authority to block a specific app, no.

If you mean use his authority to influence & effectively make it happen, he can.

In other words, it is very much a threat with teeth. It would just be a roundabout path for implementation.

Post reply on HN