Biden signs TikTok bill into law, starting clock for ByteDance to divest

Post by TheVespasian » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 5:44 PM UTC

cherioo wrote: post #707

danielhep wrote: post #542

The way I see this is that democracy is extremely susceptible to tools that can change public opinion en masse. This of course applies to Western social media as much as TikTok, and I'd love to see regulation around all social media algorithms to ensure they're unbiased. I see this as a good start to counter a real threat, which is China's ability to influence US elections through TikTok.

It is not just democracy. All governance systems are susceptible to mass communication tools that can change public opinion, be it books, radio, tv, news organizations, or tiktok. It is why many non democratic countries do not have freedom of press, and a highly censored internet. This is a main contributor to Arab Spring. It is just sad that even US is susceptible to this.

Post by zhengiszen » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 5:52 PM UTC

Post by HarHarVeryFunny » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 5:57 PM UTC

returningfory2 wrote: post #38

The work "ban" is in scare quotes for a reason. The law doesn't ban TikTok. Rather, it bans TikTok from having Chinese owners. If the law stands, the end result will likely be that TikTok will be sold to US owners, rather than TikTok going away. It's surprising to me that this this pretty significant distinction has been glossed over both in media reporting and in general comments here on HN. To be clear, I'm not sup…

Post by huytersd » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 6:16 PM UTC

noobermin wrote: post #842

gigatexal wrote: post #809

I see this as a national security threat that it is. The potential for abuse from the CCP on the minds of US users exists as does the tracking the app could do and every data point that is generated is stored and potentially useful for blackmail or otherwise on members of Congress or others. The US and its allies got rid of Chinese telecom hardware from their networks for the very same reasons now it’s time to do the…

To be honest, the use of the word "enemy" is far too strong, it sounds like we are at war with them while they somehow supply half of our goods at prices we've grown accustomed to. "Adversary" is a weaker word that is more apt (which you use later), where the US is not on the friendliest terms with China but isn't in an outright war with them. Words matter, at the very least to avoid starting nationalistic flamewars…

Post by disgruntledphd2 » Thu, Apr 25, 2024, 6:54 PM UTC

danieltanfh95 wrote: post #301

returningfory2 wrote: post #38

The work "ban" is in scare quotes for a reason. The law doesn't ban TikTok. Rather, it bans TikTok from having Chinese owners. If the law stands, the end result will likely be that TikTok will be sold to US owners, rather than TikTok going away. It's surprising to me that this this pretty significant distinction has been glossed over both in media reporting and in general comments here on HN. To be clear, I'm not sup…

Just because it doesn’t say “ban” doesn’t mean its not one. It is well known that China lists algorithms and AI models trained on citizen data as a non-export so tiktok will never be able to sell to anyone other than a Chinese company unless they retrain the model etc. The CEO has mentioned that they will simply pull out of the US market.