5 ms·

Please explain why TikTok is "owned and controlled" by the Chinese government. TikTok is just as much "owned and controlled" by an adversarial state as any app

Please explain why TikTok is "owned and controlled" by the Chinese government. TikTok is just as much "owned and controlled" by an adversarial state as any app by US corporations is "owned and controlled" by the US government due to national security letters and the CLOUD Act.

ethanbond 6y ago
No, it’s really not. Note that there is currently a very public tiff between American media and the American state. This would be impossible in China. That is the difference, regardless of whether you can pull pieces of law from either side that would indicate the contrary. State power is a complex thing that is not entirely encoded in legal code. Some reading: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/world/asia/china-media-policy-xi-jinping.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/world/asia/china-media-po... https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-china-cracked-down-on-the-social-media-giant-bytedance https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-china-crack... “Jan 25 - Xi Jinping, general secretary of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee, on Friday stressed efforts to boost integrated media development and amplify mainstream tone in public communication so as to consolidate the common theoretical foundation for all Party members and all the people to unite and work hard.” http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-01/25/c_137774923.htm http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-01/25/c_137774923.htm
- Slartie 6y ago
  That would be relevant for the discussion if the stated reason for banning TikTok were specific, concrete and actually happening actions of politically-motivated censorship. However, the stated reason is "national security" due to potential access to data of American people. Which - surprise! - is exactly what the CLOUD Act provides the US government with regard to ANY app with server-side data storage operated by ANY US-based corporation.
  - ethanbond 6y ago
    “[CLOUD Act allows] federal law enforcement to compel U.S.-based technology companies via warrant or subpoena to provide requested data stored on servers regardless of whether the data are stored in the U.S. or on foreign soil.” In case you missed it, I’ll emphasize the relevant point: “via warrant or subpoena” This is not “exactly,” as you say, the same provision.
    - Slartie 6y ago
      And what exactly prevents the US government from creating any kind of subpoena they'd like? They don't even have to defend it anywhere, because "national security" trumps the normal judicative process. The targets of the subpoena aren't allowed to talk about, and the original owners of the data sought by the government will never even see the subpoena.
      - ethanbond 6y ago
        Look, if you don’t believe in the western systems of checks and balances despite the long, long track record of it performing with greater regard for human dignity than any regime without checks and balances, we’re just not going to be able to have a conversation here. No sensible person would suggest the American system is perfect. But to suggest that an imperfect system of checks and balances is tantamount to an actual unashamed dictatorship is equally divorced from reality. There’s nowhere for this conversation to go, so have a good weekend!
        trasz 6y ago
        Thing is, there are no checks and balances for this area of government activity. Otherwise why would american companies include government backdoors in their products?
        JumpCrisscross 6y ago
        > there are no checks and balances for this area of government activity Of course there are. Congress can pass laws limiting executive actions. And the courts can constrain it.

ethanbond 6y ago

No, it’s really not. Note that there is currently a very public tiff between American media and the American state. This would be impossible in China. That is the difference, regardless of whether you can pull pieces of law from either side that would indicate the contrary. State power is a complex thing that is not entirely encoded in legal code. Some reading: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/world/asia/china-media-policy-xi-jinping.html https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/world/asia/china-media-po... https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-china-cracked-down-on-the-social-media-giant-bytedance https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/why-china-crack... “Jan 25 - Xi Jinping, general secretary of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee, on Friday stressed efforts to boost integrated media development and amplify mainstream tone in public communication so as to consolidate the common theoretical foundation for all Party members and all the people to unite and work hard.” http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-01/25/c_137774923.htm http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-01/25/c_137774923.htm

Slartie 6y ago
That would be relevant for the discussion if the stated reason for banning TikTok were specific, concrete and actually happening actions of politically-motivated censorship. However, the stated reason is "national security" due to potential access to data of American people. Which - surprise! - is exactly what the CLOUD Act provides the US government with regard to ANY app with server-side data storage operated by ANY US-based corporation.
- ethanbond 6y ago
  “[CLOUD Act allows] federal law enforcement to compel U.S.-based technology companies via warrant or subpoena to provide requested data stored on servers regardless of whether the data are stored in the U.S. or on foreign soil.” In case you missed it, I’ll emphasize the relevant point: “via warrant or subpoena” This is not “exactly,” as you say, the same provision.
  - Slartie 6y ago
    And what exactly prevents the US government from creating any kind of subpoena they'd like? They don't even have to defend it anywhere, because "national security" trumps the normal judicative process. The targets of the subpoena aren't allowed to talk about, and the original owners of the data sought by the government will never even see the subpoena.
    - ethanbond 6y ago
      Look, if you don’t believe in the western systems of checks and balances despite the long, long track record of it performing with greater regard for human dignity than any regime without checks and balances, we’re just not going to be able to have a conversation here. No sensible person would suggest the American system is perfect. But to suggest that an imperfect system of checks and balances is tantamount to an actual unashamed dictatorship is equally divorced from reality. There’s nowhere for this conversation to go, so have a good weekend!
      - trasz 6y ago
        Thing is, there are no checks and balances for this area of government activity. Otherwise why would american companies include government backdoors in their products?
        JumpCrisscross 6y ago
        > there are no checks and balances for this area of government activity Of course there are. Congress can pass laws limiting executive actions. And the courts can constrain it.