• TheMurphy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    8 months ago

    Are we acting like the US isn’t the biggest surveillance state existing in all history?

    So because there’s one app they don’t control the data on, we need to ban it? Sounds like the free market to me.

  • Delphia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    30
    ·
    8 months ago

    Yes, and?

    Does anyone think that China is just full of the warm fuzzies and wants us all to hold hands, make smores and sing kumbaya? They are every bit after power as the US is to hold onto it.

    • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah it’s sort of like accusing a presidential campaign of being “all about gaining political power”. Of course that’s the goal. That’s not the metric by which you should judge its actions.

      • i_am_not_a_robot
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Freedom of speech? Yes and no. The government has freedom of speech, but American TikTok clones do not. If TikTok users are successfully forced to use YouTube Shorts instead, they’ll get stuck with YouTube’s censorship and content control for corporate friendliness and user engagement. People like Elon give “free speech” a bad name, but it is actually a problem if for most people “the internet” is controlled by a small number of big technology companies and those companies use their positions, intentionally or not, to suppress ideas and control public discourse. TikTok users will still need to use words like “unalive” on platforms owned by American corporations.

        Constitutional protections for your home and property? Not really. Many people are renting and protections for renters vary by state. Property can be stolen by police through civil asset forfeiture.

        The opportunity to improve your socioeconomic standings, ie The American Dream, is largely a myth. Recently, the poor get poorer. Real estate values and cost of living are climbing much faster than wages for those at the bottom. If you’re at the bottom, it’s even more difficult than usual to get the four year degree and years of prior job experience required for many entry level positions with better pay.

        America has legal slavery enshrined in the constitution. If somebody is convicted of a crime, they can be sent to private prisons to do slave labor for somebody else’s profit. This disproportionately affects poor people and minorities.

      • SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        8 months ago

        These freedoms are a strength indeed, but they are also a vulnerability that can be exploited by foreign powers. Freedoms remain free so long as the people exercising those freedoms do so responsibly. I think a lot of people in the US do not exercise this freedom responsibly. I think a lot of Americans are being manipulated into voting in autocracy. Ironically.

        Complete and total freedom is just anarchy, and anarchy collapses on itself and turns into autocracy.

    • davel [he/him]@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      40
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Not all states are equivalent.

      The US is the hegemonic imperial core country (like the UK before it) and has been since the end of WWII, and even moreso since the end of Cold War I. The imperial core’s imperialism is driven by the monopoly stage of capitalism. The imperial core has been pillaging the Global South for the last 200+ years, including putting China through a century of humiliation. It caused WWI & WWII & Cold War I, and has now started Cold War II.

      The U.S. Did Not Defeat Fascism in WWII, It Discretely Internationalized It

      The US has over 750 overseas military bases around the world, and is building more to further encircle China. It constantly has multiple regime change operations in play around the world.

      But China is not a capitalist state and is not driven by the forces of monopoly capitalism. I think it has one anti-piracy base in Djibouti.

  • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Large centralised social media platform should all be banned. I miss the times when all you had was forums hosted in someone’s basement, the Internet was a better place. Short form video content is the worst of the bunch though.

  • delirious_owl@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    8 months ago

    Democrats have convinced themselves taking over TikTok is the solution to their problems, but the reality is that if Joe Biden signs this bill into law when he is already tanking in the polls, particularly with young voters, he will hand the election to Trump. The youth will not forgive a party that was so extreme it banned or hijacked their favourite platform to censor them in order to keep a genocide going.

    Best line is at the end

  • Facebones@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    They didn’t care about it being China owned

    They didn’t care about data sharing

    Share info on the platform the US can’t censor though and then it’s ban time 😂

  • makeasnek@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Yes, I too would love the US president to decide which social media platforms I am allowed to legally use and who I can legally communicate with. I’m so scared China is going to, checks notes, influence my opinion that I’m willing to sacrifice my free speech rights in the process. Regulate me harder, daddy! 😍

    • excitingburp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      8 months ago

      I would find this all extremely concerning if China didn’t regulate US platforms so heavily. For example, Tiktok has safety limitations for children in China while they have nothing at all for children in the US. It’s being used as a social/mental health weapon.

      Just remember that daddy allows you access to the propaganda that encourages defending Tiktok.

      Finally, your speech has not been limited. You can take it to any of the competitors. There would be free speech concerns for Tiktok, but it’s a Chinese company, not protected by the US constitution, and checks notes China proactively limits speech.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I would find this all extremely concerning if China didn’t regulate US platforms so heavily. For example, Tiktok has safety limitations for children in China while they have nothing at all for children in the US. It’s being used as a social/mental health weapon.

        So you’re saying China is better than the US because it regulates social media while the US does literally nothing for its own children.

        I agree.

        So! Instead of political banditry and forcing TikTok to sell to a US company we should regulate our social media companies too just like China does! Or do you really think TikTok will collect less data or exploit children less when it is owned by a US company? 😂

      • makeasnek@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Your defense is “some other dictatorship does it, so that doesn’t concern me?”. Saying things are OK because the CCP or Putin does them is a very slippery slope.

  • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Yikes, what a flawed set of premises.

    " What if Canada did the same thing to the US? They did!"

    No, they didn’t. Canada tried to boost Canadian media presence on American streaming platforms.

    Making sure gooby gets an international viewing is very different from transmitting information to an overtly hostile government known for cyber attacks on its international peers.

    “The platform isn’t a national security threat”.

    It’s a fact that the app TikTok is based off of, Douyin, sends the private data of every user straight to bytedance, owned in powerful minority stake by the Chinese government and that tiktok did the same thing with US user data until they promised they stopped a couple years ago.

    As of January 2024 however, whoops, US citizen data(names, birthdates, location) is still being sent back to bytedance: https://www.wsj.com/tech/tiktok-pledged-to-protect-u-s-data-1-5-billion-later-its-still-struggling-cbccf203?mod=followamazon

    It’s not some baseless concern, it’s a national security consequence against data disclosures that were already carried out and have continued to this year despite assurances 2 years ago that data leaks to bytedance are not happening.

    “Instrument of soft power”

    Marvel movies becoming super popular internationally is an example of soft power. Gathering the personal information of users with a continuing precedent attacking US digital infrastructures and democratic institutions is not soft power, it is hostile statecraft.

    I am not a proponent of monolithic tech companies nor am I particularly aligned against international competition in tech supremacy, but this ban isn’t about theoretical cultural competition.

    This tiktok ban is about the recent gathering of personal information that can be used to assess and attack digital infrastructures and electoral behaviors by entities that are continually attacking digital infrastructures and electoral processes, entities focused on consolidating power not within some international free market of soft cultural influence but by gathering and consolidating power and using that power to forward state ambitions.

    • firefly@neon.nightbulb.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      @Varyk@sh.itjust.works @davel@lemmy.ml

      If we wanted national data and communication security we would shut off the transatlantic cables and physically separate the U.S. Internet from the rest of the world. All matters of diplomacy could be conducted in public courts at the coastlines instead of over telephone wires and emails. Problem solved. We could set up a nice star-spangled curtain and let all the globalists rot from the fallout.

      • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        “Afraid of your neighbor’s dog? Never leave your room, add a harness to your bed and strap in, wear plate armor at all times”.

        Not exactly practical.

        There are ways to improve security without immobilizing yourself.

        Blocking the widespread distribution and use of an app that sends personal and national data to a hostile government actively collecting and using that data to conduct digital and electoral attacks is not immobilizing, it’s a simple step with zero downside that safeguards hundreds of millions of people.

          • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Actually, I have time, so let’s dismantle your comment.

            "Keeping thieves and robbers from entering your house is not, ‘immobilizing yourself.’ "

            Nobody said it is.

            “The idea that America would be immobilized by taking care of itself instead of carousing around with the rest of the world is just silly.”

            Something nobody said again, but:

            Thinking that having literally enough land to fit people and resources to perpetuate some contemporary level of technology ignores all of history and every metric of national success.

            You know who had overabundant physical resources and separated themselves from other civilizations?

            Incans.

            “Canada could also seal off its borders and in a thousand years from now still be going strong.”

            So we ignore Canada’s transportation imports, machinery imports, electronics imports, plastics imports, energy imports, services that alone account for 1/3 of Canadian GDP, then Canada will “go strong”?

            5 winter months a year without cars, oil or modern manufacturing to compensate for the weather, not to mention financial services, infrastructure services, science in every form; they’re sunk.

            Oh and we can’t forget that you are wishing away Canadian exports, which also account for 1/3 of Canadian GDP.

            Your canadian isolationist whim has zero legs to stand on and 1.5 trillion dollars of debt annually.

            “International relations are the cause of war” in the same way that air is slowly poisoning you to death.

            Such a zoomed-out, irrelevant statement ignores literally every significant factor of conscious reality.

            There are two hundred ish countries.

            Show me the thriving utopias that refuse to interact with any other countries.

          • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            You’re arguing the international merits of “separate but equal” while ignoring how much the United States and other countries have benefited from open borders.

            You are wrong top to bottom here on every short-sighted jingoist allegation.

              • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                You haven’t entered a discussion, you’ve cried incredibly short-sighted neoconservative talking points that I’ve completely taken apart in my other reply to you.

                I attacked your ridiculous comment, not your character, unlike your personal insults.

                You’re labeling me a “reactionary” because I didn’t call you any of the slurs you listed.

                You might want to sit in that a while.

  • Howdy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    8 months ago

    The probability of a war between the US and China is very high as judged by the US military. Prominently over the Taiwan situation. Having service members with tiktok on their devices would be terrible for opsec. To me this confirms that we are continuing to track on that train of thought. With that line of thinking this seems to an increased likelihood. Be careful out there folks.

    Just my thoughts…

  • delirious_owl@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Bans can be bypassed, but my concern is if the new law makes it criminal to use tiktok. If so, the media should stop saying “tiktok ban” and instead say “new law makes it a crime to use tiktok”

  • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Seeing as how Mussolini has a daughter who is alive today and just as fascist as their father, is this person Marx’ descendant?

  • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    The platform isn’t a national security threat, but a challenge to silicon valley’s dominance

    No, I’m pretty sure it’s just both

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    The main point is that tiktok can persuade people politically and cannot be sued by the US government. So it must be owned by a US entity so it plays by our rules… keep the same asshole politicians in power. You want bridges and got no rivers? A Republican or Democrat can deliver! And ofcourse all the partisan stuff like religion in school, freedom for everyone etc.