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

FCC: TikTok is unacceptable security risk and should be removed from app stores

blog.malwarebytes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 899 posts

Re: FCC: TikTok is unacceptable security risk and should be removed from app stores

#861

Post by KptMarchewa »

atwood22 wrote: post #649
KptMarchewa wrote: post #570

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's extremely not. Cooperation generally benefits everyone, and hostility can decrease value for everyone besides few criminals on top.

Benefiting from cooperation doesn’t mean something is or is not zero sum. Take war for example. I can team up with others to form an army and conqueror distant lands. By cooperating, everyone in the army benefits more than they could individually, but the source of those benefits comes from the zero-sum expense of others. The only source (I can think of) of positive sum benefits is innovation. I can, for example, tak…

Model war as hostility between nations or fractions. The fact that this fraction can be internally consistent does not mean that war represents cooperation.

Re: FCC: TikTok is unacceptable security risk and should be removed from app stores

#862

Post by johnywalks »

drstewart wrote: post #124
johnywalks wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The audacity of the US. They literally spy and collect data from the whole internet - not just US citizens, EVERYONE! Data collection aside - relying on a single Appstore that is governed by US law is not acceptable.

Don't forget the audacity of the EU, who try to fine US companies for data collection but then spy on their citizens and the internet! https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/11/french-officia... https://phys.org/news/2018-05-german-spy-agency-tabs-interne... https://www.thelocal.de/20200519/court-slams-german-spies-fo... https://www.thetrumpet.com/17338-germany-can-legally-spy-on-... https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/…

US applies US law globally. EU applies EU law in the EU - see the difference? At the very least, we as Europeans have some influence over local politics.

Re: FCC: TikTok is unacceptable security risk and should be removed from app stores

#863

Post by david_allison »

NullPrefix wrote: post #858
david_allison wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 'row' of packet capture data (in Wireshark's output). I apologize for the lack of clarity. I'm unfamiliar with network terminology and unsure what this looks like on the binary level. The files are in: /storage/emulated/0/MIUI/debug_log/common/tcpdump if you have a phone to test.

Does it refer to just WebView in your own app or general browser app too?

The standard Android ability to get WebView history is only the history for the instance of the WebView which you created (totally reasonable IMO, there's lots of non-nefarious purposes that you'd want to intercept requests[0]).

To my limited understanding, the file on Xiaomi phones is a dump of all the packets that your router would see. If you're using HTTPS, it's probably leaking the sites, but it's mostly garbage.

[0] https://github.com/ankidroid/Anki-Android/blob/31cfbc914a746...

Re: FCC: TikTok is unacceptable security risk and should be removed from app stores

#864

Post by pastacacioepepe »

thematrixturtle wrote: post #497
pastacacioepepe wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The poverty rate in US is ~14%, that's tens of millions of Americans living in poverty. Comparing incomes directly doesn't help, how much can $5k buy you in China vs how much can the poverty level income buy you in US?

The Per capita income of the United States is 5.78 and 3.61 times higher than that of China in nominal and PPP terms, respectively. So the answer is that even in purchasing power parity terms, the average American is 4x richer.

Except that in the US it just takes some health issue to put you in debt for years/life. Or that to exist in the US you are required to buy a car and so on, since it has a third world public transportation system.

The pont being that you can still have somewhat higher life standards with less purchasing power but a stronger social state.

Re: FCC: TikTok is unacceptable security risk and should be removed from app stores

#865

Post by theplumber »

SkyMarshal wrote: post #827
theplumber wrote: post #792

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks like you've missed the past 10-20 years of history. You are a "party" supporter not a human rights(i.e privacy) supporter

> You are a "party" supporter How do you mean exactly? I'm not sure how you can draw that conclusion from what I said. Politically I'm an independent, there's no real home for me any US political party.

You support the U.S government rather than specific policies. That makes you a party supporter on the international stage.

In this particular case you support U.S oversight over personal data rather than personal privacy(i.e banning data harvesting).

It's like saying it's fine for the Democrats to harvest personal data because they have a better track record than the republicans and after all "you" are democrat so being part of this select group makes you feel safe from a potential abuse. The sensible/right thing to do would be to ban the data harvesting.

Re: FCC: TikTok is unacceptable security risk and should be removed from app stores

#866

Post by negus »

okasaki wrote: post #723
Xeoncross wrote: post #721

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US isn't rounding thousands (millions actually?) of civil, political, religious, and other kinds of dissenters and imprisoning, reeducating, or killing them. That's kind of a big difference here. The CCP has mandatory seats on the bytedance board and wants a copy of all the data so they can target people. Spying is bad, murder is next-level bad. Stop it all, but start with the bigger issues first.

Does the US have dissidents?

Edward Snowden?

Re: FCC: TikTok is unacceptable security risk and should be removed from app stores

#867

Post by trasz »

thematrixturtle wrote: post #843
trasz wrote: post #802

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No - they made it clear that they will use military force if US invades Taiwan. They also made it very clear that they want peaceful solution, because their economy doesn’t depend on waging wars. Feel free to prove otherwise; note that Chinese statements are quite often misquoted.

“If anyone dares to split Taiwan from China, the Chinese army will definitely not hesitate to start a war no matter the cost,” Defence Minister Wei Fenghe said during a meeting with Lloyd Austin on Friday. “The PLA [People’s Liberation Army] would have no choice but to fight … and crush any attempt of Taiwan independence, safeguarding national sovereignty and territorial integrity.” https://www.aljazeera.com/news/202…

If anyone dares, not if Taiwan dares. Like I said, this is about third party involvement.

Re: FCC: TikTok is unacceptable security risk and should be removed from app stores

#868

Post by refurb »

pastacacioepepe wrote: post #864
thematrixturtle wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Per capita income of the United States is 5.78 and 3.61 times higher than that of China in nominal and PPP terms, respectively. So the answer is that even in purchasing power parity terms, the average American is 4x richer.

Except that in the US it just takes some health issue to put you in debt for years/life. Or that to exist in the US you are required to buy a car and so on, since it has a third world public transportation system. The pont being that you can still have somewhat higher life standards with less purchasing power but a stronger social state.

Except if you’re one of the 60% rural farmers who have access to only the most basic medical care and limited local public transit.

Not everyone lives in Shanghai or Beijing you know.

Re: FCC: TikTok is unacceptable security risk and should be removed from app stores

#869

Post by ChrisLomont »

coliveira wrote: post #813
ChrisLomont wrote: post #806

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The two examples show exactly the problem of the median: it is not that different from the mean in many situation when we talk about salaries and incomes ??? Did you compute them? do you know how? The Brazil data I just posted has median around 1383, mean of 2308.36, which is 65% larger. An interesting test: compute with details the median and mean of the data I just posted. I already gave you the answers. I think y…

> Do you admit 50% of people in Brazil make median income or more? You're pretending to not understand what I said. The figure for median income of 8K is very different from what most people make in Brazil, because a lot of people will make less than that, and a lot make more than that. So, the median has little value, because there is just a small group that makes close to that figure compared to the other groups th…

>You're pretending to not understand what I said. The figure for median income of 8K is very different from what most people make in Brazil, because a lot of people will make less than that, and a lot make more than that

I see you've moved from "hardly any" to "a lot". Nice goal post move. I bet if you look at the actual data enough you might get to what the data shows.

The majority of people, for every country for which there is data, are close to the median income. End of story. You so far have posted so many simple math errors that it's hard to know where you got your understanding of these things.

> It is a society with large inequality that is polarized on the two sides, instead of concentrating on the middle.

There is no such country. Don't believe me? You can check this yourself:

[1] has all the data to check. Select the datasets showing income share. Select them, pick years, say 2016-2021. Download the CSV. There are 114 countries in the dataset for which all 5 quintiles of income are available for recent years.

For each compute the median. Then look at how close the middle 60% of the people are to the median.

If you really want to see that distributions are not what you believe, graph every single one. If you need tools, jupyterlab using python, pandas, and matplotlib make this task pretty easy.

In EVERY single one you will find the majority of people are decently close to the median. I just checked. Do it yourself so you stop believing all this mystical non-existent income distribution where people are not majority near the median.

I know you're convinced there are income distributions like those you made up, but there simply are not. It is empirical fact.

So, if you want to continue to claim what you are - do what I told you to do, pick the country you think best supports your claim, and post the actual data.

Until then you are simply wrong.

This is why economists, even those working in inequality, start with the median income when discussing income. It is the best point indicator of what the majority of people in a society earn.

[1] https://databank.worldbank.org/reports.aspx

Re: FCC: TikTok is unacceptable security risk and should be removed from app stores

#870

Post by Clubber »

yucky wrote: post #844
Clubber wrote: post #823

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>where the bulk of the power in government should rest You are thinking federalism vs anti-federalism. That was Jefferson and Hamilton. The federalists won a long time ago, mainly through the interpretation of the commerce clause. Recent decisions by the SCOTUS is pulling back on that a little bit. >Republicans generally believe direct democracy Nowhere did I say the US was a direct democracy, I think that's what's t…

>You are thinking federalism vs anti-federalism. Nope. At least not exclusively. The party's change over the years but we have essentially always had one party pushing for more direct democracy, and one party pulling against. A rose by any other name is still rose, but the philosophical idea of Republic government vs Democrat government is always there. And it's the key difference in the two parties. >I don't see any…

>The entire State of California is constantly riddled with ballot propositions

Ya, I was thinking federally only. California is its own animal and they do put a lot of things to vote, so you certainly are right with this example.

>Federally, I can't go a week without reading about yet another proposal to eliminate the Electoral College and use a popular vote for President.

That's just people complaining when their candidate doesn't win. If their candidate won the electoral vote but lost the popular vote, they wouldn't let out a peep about it I'll bet. Democrats won't actually remove the electoral college because they use superdelegates to ensure the party can put its thumb on any candidate's scale (see Bernie v Clinton and Bernie v Biden).

>So if you're not seeing any evidence of it, where are you looking?

I'm talking about actual politicians proposing actual legislation and recruiting votes in the senate/house, not just lip service from the stump. They don't do it because it doesn't actually benefit them.

Post reply on HN