12 ms·

Where is EU in this embarrassment? Suppose Margrethe Vestager called and said TikTok, you are banned unless you let a "very european" company take over your bu

by chvid 6y ago

Where is EU in this embarrassment? Suppose Margrethe Vestager called and said TikTok, you are banned unless you let a "very european" company take over your business? And by the way. We would like a cut. And would the US still being able to say "national security" if it was fully owned by German business running on servers in some Swiss mountain?

babesh 6y ago
Trump is signaling that Microsoft is his lackey and Microsoft is signaling in the affirmative. That cloud business from the Defense department sure is lucrative.
- chvid 6y ago
  Something like that. Plus remember when Zoom was a national security threat? You know with that Chinese guy in charge, the Chinese servers, the censoring on behalf of the CCP ... Funny how that all disappeared when Zoom got in bed with Oracle.
  - abc-xyz 6y ago
    Zoom is of course still a national security threat.
    - sneak 6y ago
      Nothing Zoom does or does not do threatens the continued existence of the United States in any capacity. Calling nearly everything on or related to the internet a matter of "national security" is to demand that everything be overblown.
      - Loughla 6y ago
        It's the new 'think of the children' argument. People can't be convinced it's used for child pornography, because that's pretty easy to prove/disprove. So now the boogeyman is national security.
        thephyber 6y ago
        "National Security" has always been the ultimate unfalsifiable accusation. Only those who have access to the underlying classified information can legitimately make the argument. Those who don't have the same access must trust those who do. The system breaks down quickly when the former group gets everyone into a war because they failed to vet the underlying intelligence or purposefully misconstrued the intelligence or they just moved the goalposts of "national security" to include preemption.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    They've signalled pretty significantly that they won't follow the Chinese government's demands, including publicly joining the Hong Kong data pause. I don't mean to fully excuse the initial response (Zoom was always an American company with an American CEO!), but the Oracle partnership isn't the only thing that's changed.
Traster 6y ago
The US has seen a slow but sure move towards executive power for a long time now. Congress has passed multiple laws to allow to give the president extra powers under certain conditions repeatedly. Meanwhile, presidents have been taking these powers and using them to do policy work that really should be done by congress. This is why DACA was such a mess, why we've got national emergencies dating back 30 years for the war on drugs[1]. Essentially yes, they can assert that anything is national security, and whilst countries might try appealing to the WTO or such, it's really ineffective. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_i...
_pmf_ 6y ago
> Suppose Margrethe Vestager called and said TikTok, you are banned unless you let a "very european" company take over your business? This would make sense if the EU had any company remotely capable of being able to afford this.
- bryanrasmussen 6y ago
  https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2005/europe/ https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2005/europ...
  - rrdharan 6y ago
    That’s sorted by revenue not cash on the balance sheet. Here’s a more salient list: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/07/microsoft-apple-and-alphabet-are-sitting-on-more-than-100-billion-in-cash.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/07/microsoft-apple-and-alphabet...
- chvid 6y ago
  Hey ... we can print money too ...
Hokusai 6y ago
> Suppose Margrethe Vestager called and said TikTok, you are banned unless you let a "very european" company Wouldn't do this make sense for Facebook? I would like to see a European company owning the European side of Facebook. I really like Silicon Valley and their initiative, but again and again American companies have shown that they cannot be trusted with European data (maybe USA data either, but that is an internal matter of the USA). Facebook, Twitter and other social networks are the new public squares for social discussion. Even more now that many people works from home. I can understand USA decision on this matter (not the way as it has been imposed in a short time-line and without much feedback). And I can see that Europe not acting in the same way damages European citizens capability to regulate their own public spaces. I also see anti-globalization as a risk for many other types of products and services. A healthy global market has provided growth and stability. Meanwhile digital social networks have been a source of radicalization and manipulation of citizens from all around the world. A different approach is needed to product shoes or phones that to provide citizens with public spaces.
- andreilys 6y ago
  I really like Silicon Valley and their initiative, but again and again American companies have shown that they cannot be trusted with European data Source? Btw HSBC [1], Unilever [2] and many other European companies have had customer data breaches. I’m sure there would be even more but Europe has almost no top internet consumer companies So I don’t have a lot of trust in European companies to safeguard customer data, curious to hear why you do. https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2018/11/06/hsbc-bank-usa-admits-breach-exposing-account-numbers-and-transaction-history/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2018/11/06/hsbc-ban... https://www.verdict.co.uk/fresh-film-data-breach-dove/ https://www.verdict.co.uk/fresh-film-data-breach-dove/
  - sandworm101 6y ago
    >>American companies have shown that they cannot be trusted with European data. Source? Room 641A? NSLs? Lotus Notes? The RSA fiasco? The EU report on Project ECHELON? The PSP? CNN? PBS Frontline? Edward Snowden? ... all the security news for the last few decades. I might not agree with the idea that US companies are totally untrustworthy, but I would never suggest that idea is unfounded.
lovetocode 6y ago
Because the Chinese cyber threat is incredibly real. The United States should be playing hard ball. The US TikTok systems are compromised by Chinese spammers already.
- borg_ 6y ago
  > Because the Chinese cyber threat is incredibly real. Comment like this lumps tiktok, a privately owned company with the Chinese government with no evidence. It's never about national security but really about US politicians seeing a social network with real reach in the US that for the first time does NOT need to pay to lobby in the US, nor to be responsive to congressional inquiry (as they have been able to do recently with US tech platforms, accusing platforms of suppressing conservative/liberal views, again without evidence). If you know anything about bytedance's founder you would know that he's been an outspoken globalist, criticizing the government's approach to free flow of information on multiple accounts. Uninformed comments like this is truly tragic for many globalist people in China who grew up hoping for a global stage with open, fair competition and who often do not agree with the government's perspective.
  - FooBarWidget 6y ago
    It's worse than that. The hostilities towards everything China in 2020 are pushing all sorts of Chinese people away, who otherwise would have been supportive of US and liberal values. What baffles me is that nobody knows that this is happening. Nobody is trying to understand how the other side sees it, and to work towards a real solution. Or maybe people are just wilfully blind to this possibility. People are so convinced that their view is the only possible legitimate view, and that no other legitimate views could possibly exist.
    - ir77 6y ago
      anyone with power and wealth in china is dependent on the government, they only have these things because the government allowed them to have and keep it, for now. thus it really doesn't matter how one individual on that side sees things, he sees things the way his side allows him to see. it would be different if people exiled from china and were getting involving once they're in the western world, but to broadcast one's independence while in china is a moot point. i have been to china many times and have many chinese friends, also many HK friends, and the chinese, while while very hospitable to the US will never pick US over china, never publicly or to an outsider anyways, they always follow the party line. until the mentality of the regime allows and tolerates the discent there are no unique feelings on the other side to consider.
dr-detroit 6y ago
There are 2 versions of "China as a threat". One is against the American people (ha!). The other very much more serious one is a bunch if billionaires called Fa Loon Gong that literally send mail (and electronic ads) to me every single week in America trying to get us to conquer China so Fa Loon Gong can reinstall their family as little emperors. FLG are major political donors so their lies get parroted by politicians.
pjc50 6y ago
The EU can't use national security as an excuse because it's not a nation and doesn't have a state security apparatus of its own. Individual countries might. I'm not sure whether we've seen an EU single market law vs national security case yet.
nemothekid 6y ago
One of the reasons the US can do this is because this is unwinding the Musical.ly deal. The EU certainly has the ability to block an acquisition of an EU company by a US megacap.
jjeaff 6y ago
>And would the US still being able to say "national security" if it was fully owned by German business running on servers in some Swiss mountain? I suppose they could. But I am fairly confident that if tiktok was a German company, this would not be happening. China is reaping what they sew here. On top of getting a taste of their own medicine. It is unfortunate for the Chinese owners though that they have to pay the price for their government's actions.

by chvid 6y ago

babesh 6y ago

Trump is signaling that Microsoft is his lackey and Microsoft is signaling in the affirmative. That cloud business from the Defense department sure is lucrative.

chvid 6y ago
Something like that. Plus remember when Zoom was a national security threat? You know with that Chinese guy in charge, the Chinese servers, the censoring on behalf of the CCP ... Funny how that all disappeared when Zoom got in bed with Oracle.
- abc-xyz 6y ago
  Zoom is of course still a national security threat.
  - sneak 6y ago
    Nothing Zoom does or does not do threatens the continued existence of the United States in any capacity. Calling nearly everything on or related to the internet a matter of "national security" is to demand that everything be overblown.
    - Loughla 6y ago
      It's the new 'think of the children' argument. People can't be convinced it's used for child pornography, because that's pretty easy to prove/disprove. So now the boogeyman is national security.
      - thephyber 6y ago
        "National Security" has always been the ultimate unfalsifiable accusation. Only those who have access to the underlying classified information can legitimately make the argument. Those who don't have the same access must trust those who do. The system breaks down quickly when the former group gets everyone into a war because they failed to vet the underlying intelligence or purposefully misconstrued the intelligence or they just moved the goalposts of "national security" to include preemption.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  They've signalled pretty significantly that they won't follow the Chinese government's demands, including publicly joining the Hong Kong data pause. I don't mean to fully excuse the initial response (Zoom was always an American company with an American CEO!), but the Oracle partnership isn't the only thing that's changed.

Traster 6y ago

The US has seen a slow but sure move towards executive power for a long time now. Congress has passed multiple laws to allow to give the president extra powers under certain conditions repeatedly. Meanwhile, presidents have been taking these powers and using them to do policy work that really should be done by congress. This is why DACA was such a mess, why we've got national emergencies dating back 30 years for the war on drugs[1]. Essentially yes, they can assert that anything is national security, and whilst countries might try appealing to the WTO or such, it's really ineffective. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_national_emergencies_i...

_pmf_ 6y ago

> Suppose Margrethe Vestager called and said TikTok, you are banned unless you let a "very european" company take over your business? This would make sense if the EU had any company remotely capable of being able to afford this.

bryanrasmussen 6y ago
https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2005/europe/ https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2005/europ...
- rrdharan 6y ago
  That’s sorted by revenue not cash on the balance sheet. Here’s a more salient list: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/07/microsoft-apple-and-alphabet-are-sitting-on-more-than-100-billion-in-cash.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/07/microsoft-apple-and-alphabet...
chvid 6y ago
Hey ... we can print money too ...

Hokusai 6y ago

> Suppose Margrethe Vestager called and said TikTok, you are banned unless you let a "very european" company Wouldn't do this make sense for Facebook? I would like to see a European company owning the European side of Facebook. I really like Silicon Valley and their initiative, but again and again American companies have shown that they cannot be trusted with European data (maybe USA data either, but that is an internal matter of the USA). Facebook, Twitter and other social networks are the new public squares for social discussion. Even more now that many people works from home. I can understand USA decision on this matter (not the way as it has been imposed in a short time-line and without much feedback). And I can see that Europe not acting in the same way damages European citizens capability to regulate their own public spaces. I also see anti-globalization as a risk for many other types of products and services. A healthy global market has provided growth and stability. Meanwhile digital social networks have been a source of radicalization and manipulation of citizens from all around the world. A different approach is needed to product shoes or phones that to provide citizens with public spaces.

andreilys 6y ago
I really like Silicon Valley and their initiative, but again and again American companies have shown that they cannot be trusted with European data Source? Btw HSBC [1], Unilever [2] and many other European companies have had customer data breaches. I’m sure there would be even more but Europe has almost no top internet consumer companies So I don’t have a lot of trust in European companies to safeguard customer data, curious to hear why you do. https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2018/11/06/hsbc-bank-usa-admits-breach-exposing-account-numbers-and-transaction-history/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2018/11/06/hsbc-ban... https://www.verdict.co.uk/fresh-film-data-breach-dove/ https://www.verdict.co.uk/fresh-film-data-breach-dove/
- sandworm101 6y ago
  >>American companies have shown that they cannot be trusted with European data. Source? Room 641A? NSLs? Lotus Notes? The RSA fiasco? The EU report on Project ECHELON? The PSP? CNN? PBS Frontline? Edward Snowden? ... all the security news for the last few decades. I might not agree with the idea that US companies are totally untrustworthy, but I would never suggest that idea is unfounded.

lovetocode 6y ago

Because the Chinese cyber threat is incredibly real. The United States should be playing hard ball. The US TikTok systems are compromised by Chinese spammers already.

borg_ 6y ago
> Because the Chinese cyber threat is incredibly real. Comment like this lumps tiktok, a privately owned company with the Chinese government with no evidence. It's never about national security but really about US politicians seeing a social network with real reach in the US that for the first time does NOT need to pay to lobby in the US, nor to be responsive to congressional inquiry (as they have been able to do recently with US tech platforms, accusing platforms of suppressing conservative/liberal views, again without evidence). If you know anything about bytedance's founder you would know that he's been an outspoken globalist, criticizing the government's approach to free flow of information on multiple accounts. Uninformed comments like this is truly tragic for many globalist people in China who grew up hoping for a global stage with open, fair competition and who often do not agree with the government's perspective.
- FooBarWidget 6y ago
  It's worse than that. The hostilities towards everything China in 2020 are pushing all sorts of Chinese people away, who otherwise would have been supportive of US and liberal values. What baffles me is that nobody knows that this is happening. Nobody is trying to understand how the other side sees it, and to work towards a real solution. Or maybe people are just wilfully blind to this possibility. People are so convinced that their view is the only possible legitimate view, and that no other legitimate views could possibly exist.
  - ir77 6y ago
    anyone with power and wealth in china is dependent on the government, they only have these things because the government allowed them to have and keep it, for now. thus it really doesn't matter how one individual on that side sees things, he sees things the way his side allows him to see. it would be different if people exiled from china and were getting involving once they're in the western world, but to broadcast one's independence while in china is a moot point. i have been to china many times and have many chinese friends, also many HK friends, and the chinese, while while very hospitable to the US will never pick US over china, never publicly or to an outsider anyways, they always follow the party line. until the mentality of the regime allows and tolerates the discent there are no unique feelings on the other side to consider.

dr-detroit 6y ago

There are 2 versions of "China as a threat". One is against the American people (ha!). The other very much more serious one is a bunch if billionaires called Fa Loon Gong that literally send mail (and electronic ads) to me every single week in America trying to get us to conquer China so Fa Loon Gong can reinstall their family as little emperors. FLG are major political donors so their lies get parroted by politicians.

pjc50 6y ago

The EU can't use national security as an excuse because it's not a nation and doesn't have a state security apparatus of its own. Individual countries might. I'm not sure whether we've seen an EU single market law vs national security case yet.

nemothekid 6y ago

One of the reasons the US can do this is because this is unwinding the Musical.ly deal. The EU certainly has the ability to block an acquisition of an EU company by a US megacap.

jjeaff 6y ago

>And would the US still being able to say "national security" if it was fully owned by German business running on servers in some Swiss mountain? I suppose they could. But I am fairly confident that if tiktok was a German company, this would not be happening. China is reaping what they sew here. On top of getting a taste of their own medicine. It is unfortunate for the Chinese owners though that they have to pay the price for their government's actions.