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

71–80 of 741 posts

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#71

Post by tzs »

What happens when one or both of these happen:

1. Apple adds easy support for non-Apple app stores and side-loading to iOS to comply with the recent EU regulations that require opening things up in 2024, and then people can download TikTok from outside the US and install it?

2. TikTok users switch to using the TikTok website instead of the app?

It looks like the main thing the app gives you that the website can't is a convenient way to film short video and edit it and add music all on your phone and then post that. Surely someone could write a social network agnostic app just for filming, editing, and adding music that can upload that short video to any of your social media accounts (TikTok, YouTube shorts, and whatever other ones allow video). The destinations could be entirely user configurable and support any social network that provides a halfway decent upload API.

What's the US going to do? Try to make a US equivalent of China's Great Firewall? I don't think that would work here, because our free speech laws make it too easy to circulate circumvention information.

If I was a company that does mobile apps I'd be seriously looking right now into making that general short video maker/uploader app. If the US does successfully cut off TikTok all those users aren't going to just stop wanting to post and read the kind of things they are now doing there. They are going to try to move to other platforms. Done right, maybe my app would be something they use as part of that.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#72

Post by kelseyfrog »

alephnerd wrote: post #67
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.

Why can't the US throw it's weight around and get "developing nation" status as well. It certainly seems beneficial.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#73

Post by mark_l_watson »

While I don't personally mind banning Tik Toc since I think that it is a drain on our culture and is likely addictive, I do have serious concerns:

Why nothing about US media companies pushing advertising based on data that really should be protected by privacy laws?

Why nothing about the material released from Twitter by Matt Taibi, et. al.? Very concerning stuff for a country talking the talk about democracy.

Why not enforce limits on what kids can watch and for how long, as China does? While I am all for free speech and liberty for adults, I think it is necessary for parents to put some guardrails on their kids.

There is a lot more at stake here: the USA (my country) is struggling to maintain the dollar hegemony, has some severe looming economic problems, and has the same general problems shared by all countries. The USA has been very successful by carrying a big stick and hitting other countries with it. But, what was once a successful strategy is, I think, now a very poor strategy. An Empire like ours should sometimes orchestrate a graceful exit, on terms best for our country. Now when I say best for our country, I mean best for people, and not what is best for Wall Street, Our Military Industrial Complex, etc.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#74

Post by kube-system »

madeofpalk wrote: post #53
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?

Because China has strict censorship laws, so should the US?

China also has strict economic requirements for foreign companies too. Foreign companies of specific “strategic industries” are prohibited from operating independently in China and must open up as a joint venture with Chinese domestic companies and have party members on their board.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#75

Post by wincy »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #44
ReptileMan wrote: post #39

How do you square this circle with the first amendment?

> square this circle with the first amendment It's authorizing the President to ban certain classes of transactions. Not behavior let alone speech.

Right he’s just closing down one of the “public squares” then saying “of course you can talk on these other less popular public squares!”

This is mind boggling that every single person on HN isn’t terrified of this.

Surely most of us were around in the 2000s when the Bush Administration demonized people who spoke against the war? Aren’t we the same people who were railing against censorship then? What HAPPENED to that community I grew up with that wouldn’t put up with censorship, who held free speech as the backbone of democracy? Where are all of those people now?

I have a few hunches, and I’m not sure I’d like to know the answer.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#77

Post by Gigachad »

jml7c5 wrote: post #65
Gigachad wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Tiktok is not just a dumb video host. They chose the content they show to users. And the content their system is shoving in users faces is destructive.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#78

Post by charlieflowers »

paxys wrote: post #35
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.…

You are overestimating how much of a concern 2 is for lawmakers. Meta getting its ass kicked is a happy bonus for both political parties.

Agree, but then Meta and others are lobbying (throwing money at those politicians), which buys concern from the lawmakers.

Re: Senate Bill to Ban TikTok

#80

Post by ReptileMan »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #44
ReptileMan wrote: post #39

How do you square this circle with the first amendment?

> square this circle with the first amendment It's authorizing the President to ban certain classes of transactions. Not behavior let alone speech.

Do you think that the President banning people to sell paper, ink, electricity and internet access to the NYTimes has any chance to fly as not violating the 1A? I mean they can shout from the windows and write on the glass windows with lipstick.
Post reply on HN