• @Viking_Hippie
    link
    -279 months ago

    Congress has literally said it’s about foreign influence

    Which is also a lie. The likes of Twitter, Facebook and Google are just as beholden to foreign governments such as the fascist regimes of India, Israel, Myanmar and others. They pay the people in Congress a lot more in legal bribes, though, so they can basically get away with anything.

    It’s not a ban, if China gives up control of the app to a United States entity then there’s no problem.

    Imagine the uproar if China demanded that Google stopped being a US military contractor…

    What the whole thing is about is empty symbolic rhetoric and xenophobia in an election year and oppressive measures to go with it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      44
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Google was blocked in China in 2014 for refusing to censor search results. Now search results are censored and must go through their Hong Kong subsiduary. The last part is what the US Government is asking for TikTok to do right?

      China already bans and censors loads of apps and websites already so I don’t think looking at what they do in this instance is a good idea.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          149 months ago

          Okay. Which part of what I written makes you think that? I thought my second paragraph was enough to say China doing things is not a reason to do things.

      • @[email protected]OP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -10
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        China did that. We criticized them for it. Now we’re turning around and doing it. “We should get to do it because insert dictator here does it” isn’t a great argument.

    • borari
      link
      fedilink
      209 months ago

      Imagine the uproar if China demanded that Google stopped being a US military contractor.

      China is actively demanding that all Chinese companies excise American hardware and software from their technology stacks. They know that they can’t divorce a US tech company headquartered in the US from the US intelligence agencies, so it is the next best option. This is colloquially known in China as “Delete A” or “Delete America”. Who is being xenophobic again?

      • @Viking_Hippie
        link
        59 months ago

        Ok, China is a bad example, except as what not to do.

        As you pointed out yourself, this bill is Congress acting like the oppressive Chinese government rather than the liberal democracy the US likes to pretend to be.

        • borari
          link
          fedilink
          7
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Preventing an oppressive government from exerting undue influence on another sovereign nation’s citizenry is an oppressive act itself?

          • @Viking_Hippie
            link
            -29 months ago

            Dude. Tiktok is a social media platform that happens to be owned by a company with Chinese government connections.

            It’s not a nefarious conspiracy to control Americans. That would be Facebook and the Republican party platform

            • borari
              link
              fedilink
              79 months ago

              Agreed on the Republican party bit.

              If Facebook could be considered a nefarious conspiracy (or at least subservient to the powers engaging in said conspiracy), why is it unbelievable that TikTok could also be?

              • @Viking_Hippie
                link
                09 months ago

                Because Facebook has been PROVEN to knowingly allow widespread coordinated election tampering (Cambridge Analytica, for example) and steering users towards far right pages and groups,

                Tiktok is only SUSPECTED based on association with China and furthermore has a much smaller user base and therefore less impact if they DO run election influence campaigns like Facebook does.

                • borari
                  link
                  fedilink
                  49 months ago

                  The US could, if there was the political will, hold Facebook accountable for this because Meta is an American company. The US would not be able to hold a non-American company accountable in the same way. I do not see a conflict between wanting Meta held accountable for allowing things like Cambridge Analytica to occur and not minding the US taking proactive action on TikTok.

                  • @Viking_Hippie
                    link
                    -29 months ago

                    So which is it?

                    Is the US unable to hold Tiktok accountable or is it/should it be allowed to dictate the ownership of Tiktok?

                    I’d argue it’s neither. The US is perfectly within their rights to enforce US laws within the US, including towards companies not based in the US. That’s literally what being a sovereign nation means.

                    As for forcing the change of ownership of a company that hasn’t been found guilty of anything but SUSPICION based on ASSOCIATION, that’s some banana republic demagoguery nonsense designed to make right wing voters think that politicians up for re-election are “tough on China” and centrists think they’re “standing up for democracy”.

                    It’s not “proactive”, it’s oppressive and unjustified.

      • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺
        link
        fedilink
        -3
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        The difference being that this is about protecting sensitive data like trade secrets, in a complex ecosystem that is impossible to fully oversee. Many western governments have banned Huawei from 5g network components for the same reason and that is solid reasoning.

        But with TikTok it is a very different story. Nobody needs to use it. People are using it voluntarily. In regards to steering people to bad content through its algorithm, it is no different from Facebook or Instagram. The argument @[email protected] made is valid.

        It is not about preventing foreign or private influence that his harmful to the citizens. It is about controling that influence.

        • borari
          link
          fedilink
          49 months ago

          It is not about preventing foreign or private influence that his harmful to the citizens. It is about controling that influence.

          No, it is about preventing foreign influence on citizens. The fact that some level of control (or more accurately accountability) can be exerted by the US government on companies like Meta is true but unrelated. If ByteDance was a company in the EU we wouldn’t be having this conversation.