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

Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 677 posts

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#661

Post by luckylion »

wbillingsley wrote: post #650
luckylion wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's really far fetched though. Consider this: the CIA kidnaps and tortures people. They can look at Facebook activity. Therefore, all countries should ban Facebook because it might lead to their citizens being kidnapped and tortured by the CIA. That's equally far fetched and I don't think anybody is seriously arguing for it.

> Consider this: the CIA kidnaps and tortures people You're clearly a lot more invested in this than I am. I'm not aware of any CIA kidnappings; I am aware of news headlines on HK media executives being arrested and am aware that the Chinese government is heavily invested in monitoring the views its diaspora express in a way that the US government isn't. (If an American called Trump a goose, they'd probably get upvot…

Knowledge gaps can be filled: https://www.ecchr.eu/en/publication/cia-extraordinary-rendit...

Yes, the quantity is different, the quality I'm not sure about. Are Chinese internment camps worse than Gitmo or Abu Ghraib?

The Chinese have apparently kidnapped people off the street as well, but not in Western states to my knowledge. That's different with the US, though maybe they haven't kidnapped anyone in China or Russia.

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#662

Post by eshtonrob »

howlgarnish wrote: post #205
MetalGuru wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you honestly believe that geopolitics don’t play a role in China banning US tech companies? You think China would allow Google if it censored search results?

Of course they play a role, and those same Chinese laws also dictate that any foreign IT company needs to have a local partner. But in the unlikely event of Google agreeing to a JV that cedes enough power to a local company, then sure, why not? That's how eg. AWS China operates: https://www.amazonaws.cn/en/about-aws/china/ FWIW, Google already has a substantial presence in China, but they don't target consumers there…

That's not how the law works at all. The actual issue is data collection in China meaning data collected in China must be stored in China. Foreign tech companies just choose to have a local partner to avoid direct liability.

I work at a French software company in Shanghai (outside any pilot zone fwiw) and we don't have or need a local partner. Our software is on-prem so data storage is not an issue.

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#663

Post by tester34 »

CraigJPerry wrote: post #648
_fx6v wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think they’re any less or any more other than the potential net vectors exposed. A boomer typically has traditional media as a source of information which shapes their world view. These channels have their own programming and narratives. The zoomers are entirely on internet platforms which has a higher degree of manipulation. Every single person is mined against. Every single person gets optimized against. Th…

Replace “internet platforms” with television and you can run this same argument in the 1930s. Heck, people made this argument for the printing press.

The difference is, that foreign gov couldnt/cannot that easily broadcast TV programms in your TV nor press.

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#664

Post by eru »

username90 wrote: post #493
eru wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like your typical argument for a free press would apply here just as well? A free press also includes a free press for people you disagree with.

China controlling your communication isn't free. Free press includes freedom from pressure from other governments.

Well, free press also means that you shouldn't be forced to consume media you don't like.

But media you don't like being produced at all is perfectly compatible with a free press, including dislike because of influences and pressures you disapprove of. (In some sense, it would be extremely surprising if you liked all the media being produced.)

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#665

Post by mantap »

dilap wrote: post #126

It's strange how so many in the US have adopted the mindset that it's important, for national security, to deny its citizens access to foreign social networks. Previously, when China did the same, this was widely viewed as an unfortunate restriction their freedoms -- the actions of an intrusive, authoritarian government. Now that the US is itself considering doing the same, many in the west have suddenly adopted the…

The situations are not equivalent at all. China blocks outside social networks so that it can control its citizens' access to information either internal or external.

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#666

Post by dfischer »

CraigJPerry wrote: post #647
dfischer wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. Again there’s no question the attack vectors - however dismissing it as “kettle” or “them too” solves nothing and contributes to making the situation worse. Every comment I make is being downvoted yet there’s a critical point that’s either entirely dismissed as insignificant because others are doing it too or divorced from the ability to reason about information warfare and it’s implications. Oh well at least…

That’s not really what’s happening though. People are reading your premise that tiktok is a viable mechanism for influencing behaviour of its users, they are then pointing out far bigger examples of the ability you cite (Facebook, Google, Twitter) to which you say that’s different and we need to focus on tiktok because good reasons and not because china but i cant elaborate on good reasons. At which point you’re bein…

I never said to focus on TikTok. I’m saying they aren’t mutually exclusive at all.

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#667

Post by _fx6v »

altacc wrote: post #448
_fx6v wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think they’re any less or any more other than the potential net vectors exposed. A boomer typically has traditional media as a source of information which shapes their world view. These channels have their own programming and narratives. The zoomers are entirely on internet platforms which has a higher degree of manipulation. Every single person is mined against. Every single person gets optimized against. Th…

Depending upon if you're counting daily or regular usage, it looks like somewhere between 50+% (daily) and 75+% (occasional usage) of boomers are on facebook. The number for YouTube are a bit lower but not by much. For comparison, Tiktok, the Gen Z share is about 50%. That is more than enough boomers being algorithmically swayed to alter an election. As has been shown (Cambridge Analytica, etc...) Facebook's segmenta…

It’s more boomers AND TikTok. The whole enchilada. Wave after wave. That’s the scary part.

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#668

Post by dfischer »

CraigJPerry wrote: post #648
_fx6v wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think they’re any less or any more other than the potential net vectors exposed. A boomer typically has traditional media as a source of information which shapes their world view. These channels have their own programming and narratives. The zoomers are entirely on internet platforms which has a higher degree of manipulation. Every single person is mined against. Every single person gets optimized against. Th…

Replace “internet platforms” with television and you can run this same argument in the 1930s. Heck, people made this argument for the printing press.

Not the same at all given the sophistication of targeting allowed.

Yes, ads have always been this. But no, it’s never been like this.

All that data on the internet is being used to train algorithms to sway global sentiment. This emerges as bots, ads, interactions, content. It’s mind blowing.

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#669

Post by dfischer »

bkor wrote: post #508
dfischer wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not mutually exclusive. Facebook is complicit. TikTok however is specifically a unique entity on its own. The demographics that use it are of critical interest to persuade additionally the data is directly at risk of being used as information warfare on increasingly elevated state cyber warfare tactics. Follow the trail of information. Look into what’s going in across the stack hardware to software to networks.…

Facebook has been used for misinformation for a significant longer amount of time. Usually I get annoyed when people say something like "but what about X", but in this case it's a case of one company often being proven to manipulate, distort, etc (Facebook) vs a possibility that another company might do that.

It’s not a possibility that another company is doing it, it’s about the state actors involved in doing it and otherwise unknown parties. In the end it’s no specific company that is responsible as the aggregate whole of all data available and the mechanisms to algorithmically control content is the sophistication of manipulation going on today.

Re: Judge temporarily blocks U.S. ban on TikTok downloads from U.S. app stores

#670

Post by dfischer »

yourapostasy wrote: post #592
082349872349872 wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My optimistic side says that if 60 second short videos were ideologically useful, CIA (or your favourite "They") would have weaponised them back in the 1960s[1]. My pessimistic side says they probably are, and maybe they even did. https://www.thinkbox.tv/research/thinkbox-research/a-matter-... [1] CIA didn't exist before 1947, so it would have to have been a different they for late 1920s, or even a different medium f…

> if 60 second short videos were ideologically useful A single 60 second video is not materially useful. But steady repetitive exposure to the same or similar messaging videos, is the foundation of TV advertising. There is likely some useful weaponization in there somewhere when the videos can be made without the assistance of a Madison Avenue crew and contract, and the consumers are pecking at the screen for more vi…

What you’re describing is exactly what’s going on. Cambridge Analytics was the smoking gun. That unraveled what sophistication of technology is being used to mine the internet and control sentiment.
Post reply on HN