• Melllvar
    link
    fedilink
    English
    859 months ago

    We’ve been covering many stories about a potential TikTok ban, including how unconstitutional it clearly is, how pointless it clearly is, and how even those who back it don’t seem to have a good explanation of why, beyond some vague handwaving about “China.”

    The bill isn’t nearly as bad as they want you to think. It bans companies in Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran from operating social media apps in US markets, forcing them to sell if they already do. These four countries are already restricted from accessing sensitive parts of the US economy, with forced sale being a legal option. Really, the only novel part of the bill is applying these kinds of restrictions to software.

    And the bill doesn’t actually punish or restrain users’ speech. It does restrain the social media company’s speech, but that may not be enough to overturn the bill on 1st amendment grounds. If you understand that social media exists to collect vast amounts of user data then you must also understand how the government has a legitimate interest in keeping that data out of an adversary’s hands. The only real question is whether the government has a compelling interest, because that’s the standard that a court would apply to this bill. And I daresay it might.

    • @cm0002
      link
      English
      499 months ago

      I hate the amount of data American social media companies collect and what they do with it

      I REALLY hate having Chinese or Russian or [Insert Authoritarian Hostile Country] doing it.

      American companies do it for the pursuit of profits, Companies from these countries are doing it to topple our government or whatever.

      Something something the devil you know…

      • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod
        link
        English
        39 months ago

        What if it becomes profitable to overthrow the government?

        • @TORFdot0
          link
          English
          69 months ago

          Then you have the failed “Business Plot” of the 30’s meant to overthrow FDR

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        39 months ago

        It’s profitable for the companies to sell it to the government… Basically just adds a step to the government getting it

      • @hamid
        link
        English
        -1
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        deleted by creator

      • Match!!
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -49 months ago

        this but the opposite, Chinese social media companies are taking my data for profit, American social media is doing it to topple the US government (also for profit)

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -79 months ago

        You do know that those mere profits are used to purchase whatever they want from the government, right?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      319 months ago

      Yeah, it’s very clearly not unconstitutional.

      The constitution doesn’t grant jack shit for rights to enemy states.

      • Melllvar
        link
        fedilink
        English
        189 months ago

        Musk’s companies are already based in the US. The issues you raise, however valid, are not really relevant to a discussion of this bill.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      129 months ago

      So they are going to put in place some hard data collection and selling regulation, right? Right?

      • Melllvar
        link
        fedilink
        English
        19 months ago

        The question is irrelevant to whether this bill is a good idea.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              1
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              Which forces Tiktok to sell or be banned, correct? The issue I see is: why not just create regulation for the root problems instead of just focusing on that app? The only reason I can see, is that their priorities do not lay with protecting people, but forcing a foreign business to sell it’s IP to strictly American companies. Wether that decision has to do with the intentional or unintentional promotion of the US’s direct involvement in the genocide in Gaza or just Big social media companies lobbying for the removal of a competitor, we can only speculate. Both sides are doing their best to push this bill, when have the ®s collectively banded together to create positive change? The point being, reading the bill is cool and all, but you do have to ask, “Why target a specific company instead of the alleged problems of foreign adversaries getting their hands on our data?” If we had hard data collection and selling regulations, it would not only allow them to ban predatory apps (foreign or domestic) but also ensure sensitive data cannot even reach our enemy’s hands.

    • @abhibeckert
      link
      English
      3
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      While I agree - the part you’re missing is the vast majority of TikTok users are outside the United States.

      TikTok doesn’t want to sell. They want some sort of “independent” subsidiary where ByteDance still profits from (and controls) TikTok and the subsidiary worries about compliance with US law. But the thing is, that’s already the current structure.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if they refuse to sell and wind up being banned. ByteDance doesn’t want to lose all their US customers, but they’d likely prefer that to selling.

      • @spongebue
        link
        English
        29 months ago

        the vast majority of TikTok users are outside the United States.

        Then they can decide that it would be better to not serve the United States users and keep the “vast majority” of their userbase as-is