44 ms·
US to ban transactions with ByteDance and WeChat in 45 days
- threatofrain 6y agoRather than every nation deploying their own internal version of X, surely the sane endgame is open source software.
- ars 6y agoSomeone has to store the videos though.
- jojobas 6y agoHaving to pay for storage seems to be a better outcome than total foreign intelligence penetration and public opinion influencing.
- Razengan 6y ago> public opinion influencing Has the USA not been doing that all over the world since forever? Hell, they usually just change governments directly, without even bothering with public opinion.
- jojobas 6y agoI'm not an American, but 1) Not all influence is equal. USA owns Australia but I wouldn't trade that for China. 2) Just because USA has spies elsewhere doesn't mean they'd tolerate spies on their soil.
- mlindner 6y agoNot through intentional federal policy. It's a side effect of US companies being the world over and US culture being spread by those companies.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- bmitc 6y agoIronically, Tencent is a major contributor to open source software. https://opensource.tencent.com/en/about https://opensource.tencent.com/en/about
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- gzu 6y agoSo does this ban transactions with all of Tencent or just those in relation to WeChat? https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-addressing-threat-posed-wechat/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-or... Section 1. (a) The following actions shall be prohibited beginning 45 days after the date of this order, to the extent permitted under applicable law: any transaction that is related to WeChat by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, with Tencent Holdings Ltd. (a.k.a. Téngxùn Kònggǔ Yǒuxiàn Gōngsī), Shenzhen, China, or any subsidiary of that entity, as identified by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) under section 1(c) of this order.
- obmelvin 6y agoSimilarly, and I honestly feel a bit silly asking this, but does this ban US investors from purchasing Tencent stock? It doesn't seem so - are these literally just bans on app transactions? Or does this also mean that, for example, WeChat couldn't host infra on Azure in Africa?
- cjbprime 6y agoAnd what's a "transaction"?
- bleepblorp 6y agoPayment.
- bigpumpkin 6y agoTime for Tencent cryptos
- runawaybottle 6y agoMicro transactions in Tencent’s games? Who knows. Tencent owns 40% of Epic Games, which owns Fortnite and the Epic Games store. This might be a symbolic move more then anything, because unless they intend to be rigorous about Tencent’s connections with all these companies (e.g Can’t buy anything on Epic’s store, or make micro transactions in games from companies owned by Tencent), they really are not stopping anything. Your purchases through Epic or Riot (League of Legends, Valorant) are not seen as ‘direct’ transactions with Tencent. Basically it’s exactly the kind of grandstanding Trump would partake in.
- whateveracct 6y agoInstagram Reels is launching at a "convenient" time.. . . ..
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- verdverm 6y agoI've had a number of tik tok-ers tell me they don't care what app it is. They care about the community and creators, and they will find each other on whatever replaces TT. I was intrigued by this sentiment, the idea that the conceptual social network is the thing of value, not the application one interacts with it through.
- lordnacho 6y agoIsn't this how real life social networks work? Some of your friends are on phone only, some you email, some on a chat service?
- bmitc 6y agoI do wonder if there's a deeper connection than Facebook simply having this feature ready to go and releasing it early. Was there cooperation of the sorts "you ban TikTok and we'll release Instagram Reels early to help distract upset users"?
- blisseyGo 6y agoFacebook has had a Tiktok competitor called Lasso for 2 years. It failed though. They are shutting that down and simply porting the features over to their existing Instagram app. https://techcrunch.com/2020/07/01/lasso-facebook-tiktok-shut-down/ https://techcrunch.com/2020/07/01/lasso-facebook-tiktok-shut...
- bmitc 6y agoMy comment wasn't about whether they already had it or not. It is obvious they were already working on it. No one could develop and release a feature so quickly. It is about the timing of the release, which could have very well been cooperatively timed.
- euix 6y agoDidn't Pompeo say something this week along the lines of banning China Mobile servicing telephone calls to the U.S.? That means if you carry a cell phone from China to the U.S. you can't get roaming service anymore? I am surprised Lenovo hasn't been singled out yet. They supply enterprises throughout the U.S. a lot of corporations that hand out laptops to their employees all use Lenovo.
- rtx 6y agoThey might be forced to sell too.
- systematical 6y agoThey ruined the ThinkPad line, please sell it to someone who can restore the brand.
- trident1000 6y agoTheres an incredible amount of foreign propaganda in western social media anyway. Twitter took down like a million CCP accounts the other month (they made an announcement about it) and thats just the ones they know about. This is a step thats at least in spirit probably makes sense but there are more larger issues. Reddit literally has an API to comment...you think all those policial default subs are real comments? Not a chance. Reddit doesnt care because it drives engagement.
- suyash 6y agoyup they are all over popular websites with fake accounts, YT, FB etc
- realusername 6y agoAlmost every CCP-owned channel on Facebook has bought fake subscribers, it's so visible they don't even try to hide it. As an example, CGTN French has 20M subscribers, more than any local French newspapers despite being virtually unknown in the country. If you go by subscribers count, it would be the most popular news platform of the country...
- baby 6y agoLink?
- realusername 6y agohttps://www.facebook.com/CGTNFrancais https://www.facebook.com/CGTNFrancais You can compare that with the top newspapers of the country: https://www.facebook.com/lemonde.fr https://www.facebook.com/lemonde.fr https://www.facebook.com/lefigaro https://www.facebook.com/lefigaro
- qeternity 6y agoA comment API makes sense as reddit originally had vibrant third-party app developers. It’s not like it can only be used for bots to post.
- ulfw 6y agoForget I said anything. HN is infiltrated by propaganda without people even realising.
- forsaken 6y agoLike...China?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- draw_down 6y agoAh, you see, it’s different when they do it.
- myopenid4 6y agoWell China does have a valid reason to outlaw Google et. al, because they publicly siphon your data and are not shy about it. Also if you're gonna downvote, provide a reason and counter-point. This isn't reddit and the downvote button is not for "I don't like this".
- gpm 6y ago> Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. > Please don't post comments saying that HN is turning into Reddit. It's a semi-noob illusion, as old as the hills. From the guidelines Downvoting because you disagree has also been acceptable on this site, since basically forever https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171
- myopenid4 6y agoI'd argue HN is worse than Reddit, at least there are more diverse views there instead of a bunch of boomer neckbeards jerking each other off here.
- woutr_be 6y ago
- TMWNN 6y agoExplanation of CFIUS and why and how Trump can use it: https://www.lawfareblog.com/tiktok-and-law-primer-case-you-need-explain-things-your-teenager https://www.lawfareblog.com/tiktok-and-law-primer-case-you-n...
- JumpCrisscross 6y agoOur 70s-era national security regime needs desperate Congressional overhaul. I take particular peeve with the prohibitions on judicial review of CFIUS actions.
- perennate 6y agoSounds like these 1970s laws were actually a Congressional overhaul of earlier legislation, see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Emergency_Economic_Powers_Act#Curtailment_of_emergency_executive_powers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Emergency_Econom...
- mariomariomario 6y agoWow this is huge if Tencent is out of the game in the US. What happens to their stakes in companies like Reddit and Riot Games?
- sneak 6y agoAn important note that nobody seems to be reporting on: this is only possible because Apple and Google have control over which apps are permitted on your device. The US government has no legal authority to ban publishing (including apps) in the US. They do, however, have the ability to regulate trade between the operators of the App Store (Apple) and the Play Store (Google), and app publishers, which is what they're doing here. Ban the business relationship, and they've effectively banned the publishing. It's an end run around the US constitution, and everyone should be up in arms about it: not just at the US government, but also at Apple and Google for creating a legal chokepoint for mass censorship by the US federal government. This would not be possible if end users actually exercised control over their own devices. This is how the web works, and it's how everything else on your device should work, too.
- kiba 6y agoAnd how would we prevent the Chinese from simply subverting our democracy?
- voisin 6y ago> everyone should be up in arms about it I feel the same way! I can’t understand why there aren’t bipartisan calls for Trump to knock it off. Is it that most people aren’t fully comprehending what’s going on, or are those of us upset about this being dramatic?
- billfruit 6y agoWhat if the app publishers stop taking payments and ads from the US, in that case there may not be no longer cash transactions, so will the restrictions apply?.
- throwaway64054 6y agoThe (US-HQ'd) company I work for has a small but significant office in China. We are not a household name, even within tech, so I doubt we'd be a target of any retaliation by China. However, my worry is this: Whilst we have a lot of really good people in China, we don't do any business in China (and there's no realistic prospect of us doing so). So at this point operating in China seems like a huge exposure to risk for relatively little reward in the long term. But I don't see an alternative for us. Pull out of China and business continuity would take a huge hit; stay in China and accept the risks & uncertainty. Basically, I'm torn about the whole situation.
- komali2 6y agoHow bad of a hit would your business continuity take? Not to get dramatic, but, is it worth risking the lives of your employees over? Personally I won't step foot within PRC borders given my staunch pro-Taiwan sovereignty stance. It's a vicious state that has in the past indicated it will go to any lengths to protect its stature.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- balola 6y agoYour Chinese employees will be fine, but foreign personel coming in should indeed be very careful not to pique the party's attention as it will actively be seeking pawns.
- wwarner 6y agoLaws and law enforcement are the only sane ways to deal with espionage or whatever the accusation is. What Trump is doing here must be illegal, I hope it is challenged and defeated in court.
- gumby 6y agoCan someone explain the motivation?
- mienski 6y agoThe stated motivation is to reduce misinformation from China in lead up to election. Pretty wild that Facebook which was 100% proven to have been used for Russian misinformation in the last, and this election, somehow dodged a bullet on this... My (totally personal opinion guess) is that this is just another way to poke the bear as part of the tit-for-tat with China and maybe a minor contributing factor that someone has got in his ear and blamed TikTok for his low campaign event turnout after there was a TikTok meme to RSVP to his events to make them sound like they were going to be huge, then embarrass him with low numbers. Cynical perspective is that one of his friends with a stake in Facebook got in his ear about China using TikTok to make fun of him or something, and now Instagram Reels is right there to pick up the slack. Nothing would surprise me with this govt anymore. I mean the news is all talking about TikTok now instead of COVID-19... troop bounties... so on...
- perennate 6y agoI don't see anything about misinformation or the election in the executive orders [1, 2]. It talks about data collection, e.g. "potentially allowing China to track the locations of Federal employees and contractors, build dossiers of personal information for blackmail, and conduct corporate espionage" and " the application captures the personal and proprietary information of Chinese nationals visiting the United States, thereby allowing the Chinese Communist Party a mechanism for keeping tabs on Chinese citizens who may be enjoying the benefits of a free society for the first time in their lives". [1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-addressing-threat-posed-tiktok/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-or... [2] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-addressing-threat-posed-wechat/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-or... Edit: okay, there is a bit, e.g. "This mobile application may also be used for disinformation campaigns that benefit the Chinese Communist Party, such as when TikTok videos spread debunked conspiracy theories about the origins of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus"
- 6y ago
- neves 6y agoWhich workarounds you suggest around the Great Firewall of the United States of America?
- _-___________-_ 6y agoMight be time to start a VPN service with exit points in China!
- JCharante 6y agoI get it's a joke but this is already a popular service as many services are inaccessible outside the GFW or extremely throttled.
- euix 6y agoThis. It was Cisco that originally helped build the GFW in China, this is like ironies to the power of ironies, exponential levels of irony.
- stuqqq 6y agoThe GFW of China is to prevent its people to see outside. The GFW of America, at least for now, is to prevent China from peeking in. One is implemented as an allow list, the other one is a deny list.
- voisin 6y agoIs there any precedent for a president to do such a thing? I am completely astonished and dumbstruck that everyone is ok with this.
- logicslave12 6y agoDumbstruck that we wouldn’t allow an adversarial country collect data on all of our citizens locations? And potentially more?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- bmitc 6y agoIt isn't the country directly collecting and analyzing data. It is a company. Chinese companies are required to share data, but so are U.S. companies. If we focus on the companies, why is okay that U.S. companies are able to collect nearly arbitrary data on all U.S. citizens and participate in propaganda?
- secondcoming 6y agoIt's easy... Chinese companies that operate internationally are controlled by the CCP.
- xvector 6y agoWhere’s your outrage over PRISM, which is magnitudes worse?
- lern_too_spel 6y agoWhat exactly do you think PRISM is? https://www.cnet.com/news/no-evidence-of-nsas-direct-access-to-tech-companies/ https://www.cnet.com/news/no-evidence-of-nsas-direct-access-...
- suyash 6y agoDumbstruck to find that there is a leader with a spine in this country? That's quite something.
- JustAConspiracy 6y agoTencent is a particularly interesting selection given their stake in Riot Games, Activision Blizzard, Epic Games, Supercell, and others. https://twitter.com/Slasher/status/1291565115670695936?s=19 https://twitter.com/Slasher/status/1291565115670695936?s=19
- tmpz22 6y agoDoesn’t this eviscerate Chinese investment in SV?
- almost_usual 6y agoNo because wealthy people care about making more money not principles or nationalism.
- danboarder 6y agoThis is sad, we in the US are losing the little high ground we had and no longer lead by example to bring the world closer together by encouraging free markets and free people. I'm against this protectionist nationalism, it only leads to future conflict.
- baby 6y agoI don’t think the US has ever lead by example. Europe has though.
- fastball 6y agoThe US has been a champion of global free trade for more than a century. Of course, the US wants to be top dog in this free trade Utopia, and the means employed to get to those free-trade ends have frequently been terrible. But just as frequently the means have been a reasonable (and moral / amoral) push to encourage globalization, which has demonstrably helped reduce poverty and other negative stats the world over.
- karterk 6y agoUS is merely reciprocating the policies of CCP: let them allow US companies to compete fairly in China as well.
- badRNG 6y ago> US is merely reciprocating the policies of CCP Does this mean the policies of the CCP are superior to US policy to date?
- karterk 6y agoCertainly: CCP has been able to fool the world for long enough. US policy of hoping that China would open up in the long run has proven to be extremely naive.
- systematical 6y ago
- thewarrior 6y agoSome people here are wondering about the implications of this. What this means IMO is that all Chinese investments in SV need to be liquidated at fire sale prices in the next 45 days. Regardless of how people here feel about China this is a huge escalation. The US is inflicting huge losses on Chinese companies for no clear violation of US laws on their part. The pandoras box is now open. Do countries get to do this to each other whenever they feel like it now ? Can China force Tesla to sell its Chinese operations because Teslas data gathering poses a national security risk ? China has some pretty serious means available to it for escalation. China can ban Boeing from China forcing the US taxpayer to incur serious losses in keeping the company afloat. The whole thing is pretty stupid overall. Most people don't realize that during the 2008 crisis it was Chinas 500 billion dollar stimulus that kick started demand and pulled the world out of a depression. China and the US are interdependent and hold up the global system upon which global growth depends. If China slows down as a result of all this that reduces global growth. Pushing China to the wall can make them take extreme steps like undercut the entire dollar based financial order leading to mass instability. The US might come out victorious anyway but its not worth the risks. Not to mention a war which if it breaks out could lead to WW3. Previous attempts to contain China were much more tactful with things like the TPP and the Iran deal. Right now the world is hurtling towards the abyss and most people here don't even realise it. A meta point I'd like to add is that currently 10 % of the earths population in the "Westosphere" controls 60 % of the worlds wealth. This is untenable in the long term and all this flailing about will not stop a reversion to a more balanced world. Its better that this happen gracefully than in a violent fashion.
- Deimorz 6y agoHere's a diff between the two orders, if anyone else is curious about the specific changes. I used the TikTok/ByteDance order as the "original", so removals and additions are relative to changing that one into the WeChat/Tencent one: https://gist.github.com/Deimos/8fcb95ec4017cf1a28e32f6057a91e01/revisions https://gist.github.com/Deimos/8fcb95ec4017cf1a28e32f6057a91...
- deevolution 6y agoAre we witnessing the end of free markets? Or the growth of decentralization? These sorts of moves are making a very strong case for decentralized platforms.
- peteretep 6y agoMore likely the end of one-sided free markets. There's no suggestion that the US is about to pull the same shit on countries that don't try and hobble US tech companies.
- foepys 6y agoThe EU will probably start to tax tech companies that avoid taxes by registering in tax havens within the next few years. If that's the US' sole motivation, it seems like a receipt for disaster.
- peteretep 6y agoThat sounds like it’s more likely to raise US tax revenues tho, so I imagine there’ll be a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth, and no action.
- perennate 6y agoI believe there is widespread support in the US for ending tax haven loopholes.
- mlindner 6y agoI don't have a problem with this. US companies haven't been bringing foreign revenue home because the tax rates are too low in other countries. If EU taxes them then they'll bring the revenue home.
- catalogia 6y agoThat doesn't sound like a recipe for disaster to me. It sounds like a great plan, the EU should do exactly that.
- 6y ago
- iask 6y agoIs DJI on the pending list?
- rootsudo 6y agoTime to buy a drone before they're sold out.
- iask 6y agoI have two of their drones. Hope I can continue to fly. It’s helped me a lot since this pandemic started, being able to take a fun distraction. I’m able to just zone out from all those meetings, calls, reports, emails, code etc. etc.
- andrewPP 6y agoTrump is trading the reputation of the United States for just a little advantage of his own election.
- addicted 6y agoIt’s kind of hilarious that Trump claims to be worried about the possibility that disinformation campaigns might be funded by these sources, while consistently ignoring the disinformation campaign that has been investigated and proven by his own intelligence forces and his own party’s committees setup to investigate it.
- geokon 6y agoThe ongoing anti China circus through executive orders is arbitrary and draconian to say the least... and while I've been mostly ignoring it so far, a lot of Americans live in China and have money on Wechat. Are they now violating this week's "law"? The actual executive order: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-addressing-threat-posed-wechat/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-or... It's quite short and just adds a lot of FUD
- jhart99 6y agoI just went to my Wechat to try to transfer my money left in there to a friend. Transfer isn't going through.
- gzu 6y agoHuge implications if this is true and WeChat has already locked down money transfers. How could you get it out? Bitcoin?
- geokon 6y agoI just managed to move part of my money to friends. Try in smaller amounts. Sending a bunch of hongbaos works up to a point as well (then it requires SMS verification which I can't do right now)
- bleepblorp 6y agoSending multiple small transactions to evade limits might get you flagged by your bank, or FinCEN, as a potential money launderer.
- jhart99 6y agoAfter fooling around with it, I was able to move or otherwise give away the balance in my account. I had to do in a combination of smaller hongbaos, transfers and business transfers. I triggered face verification with the first transfer I tried, but some how it reset after a while.
- baby 6y agoI’m mixed about this. On one hand the US as the most powerful country should lead and be an example of the free world. On the other hand China is playing an asymmetric game with foreign companies and has banned many US companies from entering their market. Now they’re still a developing country, so this would be fine by me, except that the Chinese government is committing crimes against humanity and getting more and more powerful at the same time. This is really dangerous, and the only thing I can think of is germany pre-WWII where Hitler had huge approval ratings. Chinese people are extremely pro-CCP even in the US, this is frightening imo. And most countries are doing nothing about the xinjiang and hongkong situations. So maybe this is a good move...
- mnm1 6y agoCan't have China influencing the election. That's Russia's job. It's not like these companies are new or doing things that every tech company in the world isn't doing. National security is clearly a pretense that's laughable. If that was the case, we'd see Facebook, etc. banned in many countries.
- ashtonkem 6y agoI wonder if he's actually followed the administrative procedures act; often a lot of Trump proclamations end up being stricken down by the court for not following the proper rules. That's exactly why DACA remains in place; while the president has a lot of power over this area, there are still rules and processes that have to be followed.
- paxys 6y agoNone of these Chinese companies would have grown to what they are today without intense government-enforced protectionism at home, and until China agrees to compete on a fair playing field I'm perfectly fine with them all being banned outside of their firewall. Would China ever agree to let Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, Snapchat, WhatsApp, Messenger etc. or any new startup operate freely and make money there? It should never have had this one-way economic benefit to begin with.
- alexmingoia 6y agoTwo wrongs don’t make a right. US companies don’t have to trade with China. But the US banning trade with China is nothing but an attack on Americans and my freedom to trade and communicate.
- paxys 6y agoTry launching your app in China and see how much freedom you have. Regulating international trade (via agreements) is one of the foremost responsibilities of the federal government, and if this move forces them to open up their economy to fair competition it's a net benefit for everyone.
- alexmingoia 6y agoNobody is forced to do business with China, but you and those who support these policies are forcing me not to do business with China. Leave me alone.
- paxys 6y agoHow does this move affect your ability to do business with China?
- xvector 6y agoYou can absolutely launch your app in China if you follow the law.
- 6y ago
- PopeDotNinja 6y agoFor WeChat, how much impact will this have on Americans? As an American, I tried signing up to communicate w/ someone in China, and I couldn't get through the verification process. Obviously TikTok has a big USA presence.
- thaumasiotes 6y ago> As an American, I tried signing up to communicate w/ someone in China, and I couldn't get through the verification process. I signed up before there was a verification process. But my understanding is that you get vouched for by an existing account. Since you were signing up to communicate with someone, wouldn't that person have been a natural choice to verify you?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- tucif 6y agoIf Apple/Google are forced to take out the apps from their stores, would they have to take them out of the US only or worldwide?
- Shank 6y agoAccording to Sam Dean (LA Times): "Video game companies owned by Tencent will NOT be affected by this executive order! White House official confirmed to the LA Times that the EO only blocks transactions related to WeChat." [0] So that clears up at least a little of the ambiguity. [0]: https://twitter.com/SamAugustDean/status/1291576813685108736 https://twitter.com/SamAugustDean/status/1291576813685108736
- supergirl 6y agonot yet, but this just shows how unpredictable US is. that will surely have an effect on many businesses.
- mkbkn 6y agoSo WeChat is likely to be banned by the US govt?
- bmitc 6y agoDoes anyone know what the definition of a transaction is? The executive action is not clear at all and provides no definition of transaction. Big surprise. Furthermore, what is the government going to do if I refuse to stop using WeChat? Is the U.S. going to embark on blocking the app at the network level? If not, how will they enforce this? What if a person as defined in the order travels to China? Are they banned from using the app there, where it's one of two apps basically required to get around efficiently? This is just pure authoritarianism on the part of Trump. I am sick of him hijacking this country. And all of this is in a bid to get re-elected. He has been holding this country hostage, trying everything he can to ensure his re-election. For me personally, I use WeChat on a daily basis as it is the primary method of communication between myself and my fiancee, a Chinese citizen, who is still banned from re-entering the U.S. despite living and working here. So now it's the U.S. government's policy to implement it's own authoritarian controls on what citizens can and can't use. Honest to god. This country is a lost cause. It's filled with people who think their freedom allows them to demand access to military weapons and that their liberties are at risk due to requiring masks, but these same people will applaud this.
- perennate 6y agoI think most likely Apple and Google will have to remove TikTok and WeChat from the app store in U.S. If you install manually on Android you would probably be able to continue to use it. The executive order only bans transactions (since that is the limit of the power granted to president by IEEPA), so the executive has no authority to "block the app at the network level" -- the IEEPA explicitly restricts the prohibition of "any postal, telegraphic, telephonic, or other personal communication, which does not involve a transfer of anything of value". AFAIK the term "transaction" comes directly from IEEPA since that is the law that lets the president make this executive order, so if you want more details on what is included in "transaction" you can see the text at https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/chapter-35 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/chapter-35
- bmitc 6y agoThanks for the detail. If transaction refers to a payment transaction, then I don't understand how this isn't an abuse of power if it leads to removal from app stores, thus removing all functionality. If the president has the power to ban financial transactions, fine, but by effect, if the app is then removed from the app stores, then that effectively bans it for any other use as well, such as text, video chat, and audio calls, which is against the restrictions you quoted. If I travel to China while this ban is in place, am I allowed to use the app while in China (assuming it's not removed from the app stores)? This is all such a slippery slope. I am just so scared about my family's future. Trump is keeping my family outside of the country, needlessly, and now he is preventing effective communication.
- troughway 6y agoThis is a fantastic start. More people need to become aware of what China is currently doing with their so-called "reeducation camps". I would like to see other countries doing the same, and not just with fancy (but mostly useless) things like TikTok, but cut off Chinese involvement in anything critical where countries depend on them. It has become clear they have total disregard for human rights.
- iandanforth 6y agoUnder what authority can he issue this order?
- perennate 6y agoThe order says: > By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,
- sidibe 6y ago"Threat" aside, it does seem fair for the West to reciprocate bans on Google/Facebook etc, but not sure the best way to communicate with family in China now if the western messaging apps are banned there and vice versa
- mdorazio 6y agoEmail? I know that seems dismissive, but people got along just fine before Facebook, texting, WeChat, etc. I suspect in reality there will be an endless whack-a-mole game with messaging services where people use a different one fairly frequently.
- DEADBEEFC0FFEE 6y agoInteresting the the proprietory chat systems are struggling with this turn if events. Email has no problem. I wonder if had the big players embraced open chat earlier if we would in this situation.
- yegle 6y agoThe great firewall of China does block email. If your email address is blocked 1. When you send an email to a recipient in China who is using an email service provider whose MTA does not support SSL/TLS/STARTTLS: the delivery attempt by your email service provider will result in a TCP reset. 2. Similarly, if someone in China want to send an email to your blocked email address but their MTA doesn't support SSL/TLS/STARTTLS: their attempt to send the email will result in a TCP reset. I know this because my Gmail account is blocked in this way.
- rsecora 6y agoAnd if you can reach the MTA, that means the email itself is unencrypted. So the MTA can monitor the email content.
- yegle 6y agoThis goes both ways. If I want to send an email to someone but their MTA doesn't do encryption, I might choose to encrypt the content of my email, but I have no way to hide my FROM. Blocking the MTA server is not unheard of.
- vmlinuz 6y agoTo be clear, TikTok and WeChat are quite different 'threats', both real, but it's not clear how dangerous: TikTok is aimed at a wide market, and it's a content app - there are two worries with it, data and influence. If they are installed on a significant number of devices in the US/the 'West', and their user data is stored in or available to Chinese networks, that data is available to the Chinese government on-demand. Secondly, if they have significant enough cultural influence, they can use that to promote/demote certain topics or specific content, for a variety of purposes. WeChat seems to have no serious ambitions beyond China and the Chinese diaspora, nowadays. It's used by people all over the world to keep in touch with their friends and families, and to do business, with people in China, and it's widely-known that the content is actively monitored and censored by/on behalf of the Chinese government. Although VPNs etc are available, it's really the only significant communication and social media platform available in (and into) China. There's also pretty good evidence (although mostly anecdotal, AFAIK) that it's a channel for nationalistic propaganda, government-coordinated action and similar amongst the Chinese diaspora - actively so, beyond the passive effect of censored content. None of these things are to say that billions of people can't happily use those platforms, every day, all over the world! But they also cannot be completely ignored... And before anyone starts with "but the American government is just the same!", it's not, it's really not. The Chinese government is a literal totalitarian, authoritarian, one-man dictatorship. However much Trump cosplays as a dictator, and however much authoritarianism he demonstrates, there are huge qualitative differences.
- dirtyid 6y agoSince TenCent is huge: >Video game companies owned by Tencent will NOT be affected by this executive order! >White House official confirmed to the LA Times that the EO only blocks transactions related to WeChat >So Riot Games (League of Legends), Epic Games (Fortnite), et al are safe https://twitter.com/samaugustdean/status/1291576813685108736 https://twitter.com/samaugustdean/status/1291576813685108736 I guess Chinese users will resort to Chinese IP VPNs, there's already some to get around geofenced mainland content. E: much downvote
- Spartan-S63 6y agoI had no idea that Tencent had full ownership of Riot games. Same thing with 40% ownership of Epic Games. Wow!
- Sebguer 6y agoAlso some percentage of Discord.
- holler 6y agoAnd Reddit $150M I believe (wow didn't know that about Discord).
- bigpumpkin 6y agoand 5% of Tesla and 17.5% of Snapchat
- babesh 6y agoThis is obviously just a tactic by the Trump administration to distract people from the US economy tanking because of the mishandling of covid-19. If you haven't noticed, the US has much bigger problems. How about covid-19, the economy, lack of universal healthcare, weak education system, huge deficits, etc? I am not blaming the mishandling of covid-19 solely on the Trump administration. I am just pointing out their Wizard of Oz distraction tactic and how the vast majority of people fall for it. There is an economic competition between the US and China but this move is pure silly. WeChat isn’t doing anything in the US. It’s for Chinese people to talk to family in China.
- babesh 6y agoI think that negative votes on Hacker News are an indicator of people denying the truth. Bring it on.
- em500 6y agoStoking animosity towards outsiders is a time honored tactic of all bad regimes (including that of the PRC) to distract citizens from their own failings. Time honored because it works almost every time.
- pfisch 6y agoNow we should intermittently just turn off websites and services of Chinese companies in the US, randomly lose and/or return shipments, etc. They have been cheating us forever. We should do it too if that is the way they want to do business.
- michaelyoshika 6y agoTotally, I've just thrown out everything made in china from my house. You should do the same!
- qppo 6y agoAt least the Chinese Communist Party has the decency to make policy that has the effect of banning foreign businesses from operating and kangaroo courts to keep up the charade. I think this is going to be tossed out in court. The President does not have the power to unilaterally decide trade policy, and it's really hard to argue that a consumer software product has national security implications (even if I think it does, I don't think our courts have technically literate judges who would agree). If you want to provide consumer privacy protections that would prevent the alleged (and very likely) malfeasance of nominally-private businesses from China, write some fucking policy instead of signing an EO with no weight. Another day, more disillusionment from our federal government's ability to govern. Regardless of how much I want something like this to be in place, I want Congress to write a law that enshrines consumer privacy protection and recognizes that any business doing what they purport Chinese businesses to be doing is a national security threat ; be it from businesses foreign or domestic.
- joshfraser 6y agoFor once, I agree with Trump that governments shouldn't be spying on users data. But let's start by ending the NSA dragnet.
- khuey 6y agoSeems pretty weak to be honest. Definitely not the "American Great Firewall" that some were predicting.
- joe_the_user 6y agoAfter 45 days, would anyone logging into a Wechat server in China be guilty of circumventing an embargo? Would they have to actually be sending money?
- ponker 6y agoThis feels like the kind of thing that could make sense as part of a broad portfolio of carefully analyzed actions to thwart the rise of CCP soft and hard power, but instead is a one-off poorly considered fit of pique from a self-dealing bona fide moron right before an election.
- sozy777 6y agoOK This is huge. Trump isn't just banning TikTok he's banning Tencent and it's holdings too from operating in the US. To put this is perspective Tencent owns Riot Games (League of Legends) and has stakes in Epic Games (Fortnite), Ubisoft (Assassin's Creed) and Activision Blizzard (Call of Duty). Overall Tencent owns 108 companies across media, entertainment, fintech and education. This is going to be a mess. (universal music and Spotify also owned partially) Also how will impact companies of which Tencent owns less than 50%?
- dicomdan 6y agoWhite House has clarified that this will not affect the mentioned gaming companies and other holdings. Only WeChat itself.
- 6y ago
- jianshen 6y agoWhat is his motivation for this right now? Is it just the distraction of the week or was there a specific incident recently that triggered this?
- dicomdan 6y agoOne factor is that China has had a Firewall blocking all foreign digital competitors and information sources for a long time.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 6y agoThat's exactly the opposite of a specific recent incident. :)
- zerowangtwo 6y agoThat don't abide by Chinese law. There's a reason Bing and Skype are still allowed in China. The US government has no proof of TikTok or WeChat violating any US laws that other American companies haven't.
- alexryan 6y agoAll companies in China are required to do whatever the CCP tells them to do. If you have more than 100 employees, you must have a member of the CCP to provide oversight. Zhang Zhiming, the CEO of Byte Dance publicly grovels to the CCP. Here is his public statement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZa0FGThXak&t=5m4s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZa0FGThXak&t=5m4s
- yannikyeo 6y agoThat’s the behaviour of a dictatorship country. And now America is being like one. This is probably what China wants for America.
- 0xy 6y agoAmerica primarily sells technology. China primarily sells goods. China is totally free to sell goods into America. China has blockaded America's technology, unless the companies agree to essentially hand over IP so China can steal it (Huawei operated a cash bonus scheme for stolen IP, according to the DoJ). Does this sound like "free trade"?
- danhak 6y agoWhat a bizarre and interesting turn. I'd give a lot to be able to sit in on the meetings between TikTok and Microsoft right now. I wonder if FB will come over the top with a bid.
- almost_usual 6y ago> I wonder if FB will come over the top with a bid. Doubt it, they already have a new competing product. As soon as TT engagement drops due to friction the user will switch.
- holler 6y agoI'm not so sure, Facebook fatigue is real and TikTok built a better product.
- rswail 6y agoFacebook just introduced "Reels" to Instagram. Instagram is not Facebook and is used by the same audience as TikTok.
- holler 6y agoyeah I'm still not convinced... I don't use TikTok but my gf does and from what I've seen, they've really tapped into young millenials/zoomers and created a product that people love. Facebook fatigue _does_ seep into IG (owned by FB). The most obvious sign of it is feature creep. FB is adding every feature to IG that they can to stay relevant, but ultimately that's going to bloat the app and turn it into Blue V2, which is no longer en vogue. TikTok works because it isn't suffocated by ads and is hyper-focused on one format, aka it's a well-designed but simple experience.
- almost_usual 6y agoIG can use their existing ad platform to convince TT content producers to switch so they can monetize. There isn’t brand loyalty for social media platforms but there is for the content producer. The least amount of friction and most benefit to the content producer wins. I see TT becoming another Snap. Who knows though, I’m not invested in either company.
- dirtyid 6y agoAlso wonder if this affects wechat pay, it's gotten pretty huge in Canada in the last few years. But we have much more mainlanders. The knock on affects will be interesting. And if wechat allows web only, will US ban the service from browsers GFC style? Seems like a different can of worms than blocking apps.
- classics2 6y agoIs he trying to get Microsoft a better deal? Like, right out in the open?
- vsskanth 6y agoSeems arbitrary and capricious to me. USA is a democracy. If foreign apps are a threat laws should be passed to protect user data privacy and maintain data sovereignty and made equally applicable to all.
- supernova87a 6y agoRegardless of how I feel about this particular company or transaction, to me this is a bad overreach of presidential power. I guess it's merely a reflection of the incompetence/inaction of Congress to study the matter and do something about it, as is their responsibility. Why do I say so? 1. The justification for this is that it's a "national emergency with respect to the information and communications technology and services supply chain". Supply chain? Are you kidding me? The permissions given to the executive to declare emergencies for critical goods and services such as related to war time -- these extend to a voluntary communications app? Strains belief, and however you feel, this is not a good precedent to allow. 2. CCP is censoring / monitoring / scraping users' data, so this is a national emergency.... but not for 45 days and then also ok if we can buy the company on our terms. This is yet another thing I guess time to throw up your hands and say, this is how we live now. One throw-it-against-the-wall proclamation after another. Even if you're somewhat ok with it, are you really ok with this principle being applied, when someday it may not go how you want, for something you care about?
- rapsey 6y agoJustifications are meaningless. The US wants to curtail Chinese influence and power, so it finds some mumbo-jumbo to justify it.
- Sangama34 6y agoTomorrow this exact mumbo jumbo will be used against "California" companies and "New York" companies.
- rapsey 6y agoBy the Chinese? They have been strong arming western companies for decades. The price of doing business in China has always been severe.
- dodobirdlord 6y agoNo, the implication is that this would be done by Trump.
- nfc_ 6y agoSo does this mean Apple will have to remove WeChat from the App Store everywhere in the world including China? If Apple does this, what will it mean for their huge business in China?
- bigpumpkin 6y agoTrump just neutered Iphone sales in China. Apple can't even get revenue from WeChat now since those are transactions.
- afrojack123 6y agoOnly took a couple decades to do this. A messaging app that allows China to read everything but not other countries should be illegal to begin with. Entirely secure or not at all is the way.
- nicbou 6y agoIsn't this exactly what US companies do, and what the US government wants to do?
- ffggvv 6y agothe us needs a warrant to spy on its own citizens
- rswail 6y agoUnless it engages one of the other "Five Eyes" to do the spying.
- Cookingboy 6y agoAnd Edward Snowden is living in Russia because he loves the food there.
- xvector 6y agoI don’t understand how you can say that with a straight face after everything we’ve seen about the NSA, PRISM, etc.
- ffggvv 6y agonone of that contradicts what i said. any targeted surveillance requires a warrant
- afrojack123 6y agoThere is a difference between companies and governments. In the US, it is not so easy for the government to get access about non-Americans because it can risk the the international business of US companies.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ffggvv 6y agowould any company bother acquiring wechats american operations or are we just letting them disappear?
- shahbaby 6y agoFinally some good news
- GermanDude 6y agoWhat is it mean to the future of ADRs?
- tannhaeuser 6y agoI don't get it. It's US companies standing to loose their stronghold (near monopoly) on social, advertisement, and other forms of monetizing the web if the US creates a precedent for "national security" in this way, as in "we're welcoming social networks and free speech as long as it benefits the US and can be searched without warrant." Quite predictably, governments all over the world will be pressurized to question why they should give US companies (bred by teethless US antitrust) a free pass to destroy their publishing industry. Publishers themselves will put this onto the agenda in their own best interest. The French are already on the fence to create new digital tax legislation after EU/US negotiation have been aborted by the US side. Maybe hurting Google, Facebook, Twitter & co is seen as desired collateral damage?
- puranjay 6y agoWhat's stopping Volkswagen from lobbying Germany to ban Teslas because all the cameras in it pose a "national security risk"? This is, by all account, a shortsighted move
- ejanus 6y agoBut if Chinese social media firms are freely operating in the USA why can't the likes of FB and Twitter be allowed same free access in their market. Let's not see this as harming anybody but this is one of the ways to force China to open up and allow foreign businesses(social media) to spread in their domain. Imagine being forced to open a WeChat account just to chat with someone in China. If this kind of business model is allowed to continue only Chinese companies would thrive in the future.
- peacefulhat 6y agoIt's not going to work. It's just going to cut off Chinese in America from talking to their friends and family. Evil.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- newbie578 6y agoAfter seeing some of the comments here and seeing their half-baked "libertarian' views which are grounded in fantasy, I am speaking out and saying: Good job! It is about time! I fully support decisions like this. There is no point in playing a "fair" game if the player (China) won't follow the rules.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- return1 6y agoTime to ban AWS in Europe too. Maybe cut the transatlantic cables too. I mean we ve known for ten years we are definitely being spied on and did nothing
- fermienrico 6y agoNo one seems to be asking the most illuminating remark about this situation: The US should allow TikTok if China agrees to allow unrestricted use of Instagram in China. That should have been the deal that Trump could make to expose the assymmetry of "open market" that China keeps touting about. Everything, all arguments in this thread fall apart if people are complaining, condemning US's move to block TikTok. I agree, the justification provided by President Trump hides behind national security, it would have been far better to make a case for free trade and unrestricted access to China's domestic market. Imagine, the opportunity for Instagram to advertise to a country of 1.4 billion people. The opportunity cost is massive.
- once-in-a-while 6y agoHardcore communist Chinese government deserves it (as the psychopaths they are). The (good) people will find their way around it...
- tellarin 6y agoThis also potentially has many ramifications in different industries. Tencent (owner of WeChat) is a big investor in media and entertainment companies. One side effect, for example, is blocking financial payments to Riot Games, Epic Games, Fortnite, and half the gaming industry. Has anyone seem any details on what exactly it will cover?
- aliante 6y agoAnd China has a massive 5th column based here already, especially in tech.
- codecamper 6y agotime for android phones. let's get to work community.
- Lambdanaut 6y agoThis is how war festers. You lose the common communication mediums. It becomes easier and easier to see the other guy as BarBar-speaking barbarians. Fuck the fuckers that would rather punch back than uphold their own integrity. You can't call the other team an asshole for cheating, and then go right ahead and cheat in the exact same way. It makes you even worse than they ever were, because you ever presumed you were better. How absolutely sad. We deserve to choke on the toxic fruits these seeds may bear.
- thewileyone 6y agoChina is going to declare war on the US dollar.
- sreejithr 6y agoI agree 100% with this. I mean, there are other developing economies with serious tech sectors like India which operate according to the rules based open market system we have in place. If the US doesn't take action against Chinese protectionism, why should other countries abide by the rules and give US access to their markets? The US provides China it's market even though China closes it down for everyone. I think US being soft on China sets a bad precedent.
- thewileyone 6y agoIndia has a lot of protectionism in place for their core industries as well. Example is call centers. Foreign call centers, like in the Philippines, are not allowed to service any company that does has operations in India.
- notsureaboutpg 6y agoHahahahaha, India operates according to open market system? India was well known for silly electronics tariffs, government overregulation and favoritism, and tit for tat retaliation and mercantilism well before the US and China started their economic war.
- thewileyone 6y agoThis brings to mind the US auto industry where GM and Ford kept thinking that building cars their way would win and then lost to cars from Japan that were more attuned to customer needs. If WeChat is taken off Samsung and Apple phones, it would drive more purchasers to replacing their existing with Huawei, Xiaomi, Oppo, etc phones because digital payment is a way of life in China now. Overseas business users may buy 2nd phones to be able to access the China partners and markets. BTW, Tencent is not going to cripple WeChat to not do transactions. They make too much money from it and can afford to ignore this autocratic request.
- glloydell 6y agoI realize that this is completely speculative correlation buuuut... Part of me wonders if Trump was briefed on the Russian law going into effect last month : Nov 2019 - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50507849 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50507849 > Russia has passed a law banning the sale of certain devices that are not pre-installed with Russian software. > > The law will come into force in July 2020 and cover smartphones, computers and smart televisions. And is literally just aping Russian policy : August 2020 - https://www.state.gov/announcing-the-expansion-of-the-clean-network-to-safeguard-americas-assets/ https://www.state.gov/announcing-the-expansion-of-the-clean-... > Clean Store: To remove untrusted applications from U.S. mobile app stores. PRC apps threaten our privacy, proliferate > viruses, and spread propaganda and disinformation. American’s most sensitive personal and business information must be > protected on their mobile phones from exploitation and theft for the CCP’s benefit.
- WhyNotHugo 6y agoThere's a lot of practices that China has that I disagree with. There's a lot of practices that US has that I disagree with. China has traditionally been very closed and is very slowly moving to be slightly more open to other countries. The US used to be kinda open, but is shutting itself in like crazy. This is way so many countries are pushing so hard to reduce their reliance on the US. This can only bode badly for the US, while the rest of the world continues slowly uniting. Not _against_ the US, just uniting to work together.
- sudoaza 6y agoThis should be taken to the WTO if it wasn't coopted by the US and allies
- einarfd 6y agoI wonder how the TikTok userbase in the US is going to react to this? This could galvanized teens to action against the Trump administration. On the other hand, they could just ignore it aswell.
- c789a123 6y agoGreat action, I fully support!
- wildrhythms 6y agoWhat's the motivation?
- xvector 6y agoXenophobia.
- c789a123 6y agohttps://twitter.com/hnjhj/status/1291906465775509506/photo/1 https://twitter.com/hnjhj/status/1291906465775509506/photo/1
- c789a123 6y agoThe free world gave the criminal CCP regime a free pass after the 1989 massacre. The same criminal regime get stronger in the last 30 years and put on a capitalist shell on its bloody skin. But it never stopped its criminal practices but has been doing it more relentlessly just with more concealment. For about 20 years it made large scale human organ sells from people they kidnapped or arrested. It put up huge concentration camps in Xinjing to get rid of some minor race people in the number of millions. That is just a small sample of its crimes still actively happening. I am glad US starts to realize the CCP regime is not a country following normal human ethics.
- c789a123 6y agoA country not following normal human ethics should not be allowed to corrupt the free world unchecked.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- whoevercares 6y agoThis is just the start, introducing https://www.state.gov/announcing-the-expansion-of-the-clean-network-to-safeguard-americas-assets/ https://www.state.gov/announcing-the-expansion-of-the-clean-...
- hoyle-hortler 6y agoThis is what Monero is for. Any cryptocurrency which hides the value and participants of transactions on its chain will always have value as long as asymmetric power exists in society.
- HALtheWise 6y agoI haven't seen any discussion about how other non-China non-US countries feel about TikTok being forced under American ownership. For example, I understand that TikTok is quite popular in the middle east, and I imagine that some countries there might not be happy with American intelligence services having access to their citizens data, at least if they are also subscribing to the beliefs that short video clips are a national security matters. I suspect those countries wished that Bytedance sold just their US operations, but it appears they are instead selling _all_ non-China operations.
- Ericson2314 6y agoIs there nothing between turning the other cheek and stopping to their level? Ugh.
- afrojack123 6y agoThis is what happens when your app behaves like malware.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 6y agoI am going to ignore value judgment over whether it is fair, or whether it even makes sense and am going to jump straight to enforcement framework and EO interpretation. EO appears to single out two entities WeChat ( Tencent subsidiary ) and TikTok ( ByteDance subsidiary ). EO appears to indicate that the restrictions will be governed by sanctions framework. Tencent owns a fair amount of gaming outfits so based on ownership, for example, Grinding Gears could be affected since Tencent owns 80% stake there. Gears seems to interpret the order in an optimistic way leaning heavily on phrase 'any transaction that is related to WeChat', but ignores 'with Tencent Holdings Ltd.' and how it is likely going to be interpreted by the banking. In short, Tencent interpretation right now is 'it applies only if it only blocks transactions related to WeChat.' I personally have less generous read, but if a lawyer could actually weigh in, that would work:P Original text: Section 1. (a) The following actions shall be prohibited beginning 45 days after the date of this order, to the extent permitted under applicable law: any transaction that is related to WeChat by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, with Tencent Holdings Ltd. (a.k.a. Téngxùn Kònggǔ Yǒuxiàn Gōngsī), Shenzhen, China, or any subsidiary of that entity, as identified by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) under section 1(c) of this order.[1] [1]https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-addressing-threat-posed-wechat/ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-or... Diclaimer: I am not a lawyer yo. Don't be an idiot.
- pbhjpbhj 6y agoThis joke was good: > In addition, the application captures the personal and proprietary information of Chinese nationals visiting the United States, thereby allowing the Chinese Communist Party a mechanism for keeping tabs on Chinese citizens who may be enjoying the benefits of a free society for the first time in their lives. // Because only a fascissistic dictatorial government would be shooting on it's own citizens, eh. Who is using TikTok for something that's got any business or political sensitivity? I'm surprised Trump doesn't just admit 'China is beating us on internet platforms, we're not going to let them win financially'. He could present it as 'leveling the playing field'. That sort of overtly authoritarian dictatorial xenophobic fascism seems to be lapped up by the USA public at the moment? Or does anyone want to defend that some video of me dancing to music is somehow critical to keep private?? I can see there's a side effect of the USA administration not wanting any apps they don't have a backdoor to being used in USA. They don't say which companies will be subject to the order, really open and free (presumably to allow maximum market manipulation [fluctuation on the speculated actions, then controlled movement according to which companies the order covers] and a month and a half to get relevant bribes). Tl;dr depends if Grinding Gears pays Trump enough campaign funding I'd guess.
- jitendrac 6y agoI can understand the US decision of banning huawei reasoning for national security, but case against TikTok is not something I grasp understandable. Even India(where I live) banned Tiktok. At first I believed,its just temporary and will be lifted in few days but it didn't. These types of actions will not benefit anyone, just toss name of china with other country in above scenario. It will be something like, - EU banning Tesla because of its USA origin - US banning Reliance/Tata because of its Indian Origin - Russia banning google/facebook to favor their local companies - etc. This is something that should never happen,but sadly it is.
- pinkfoot 6y agoDoes anyone know whether the ban on WeChat means WeChat will not be available on iOS in China? If so, Hauwei must be very happy.
- cwhiz 6y agoThe entire western world should treat China exactly the same way China treats them. Western companies have a difficult time operating in China, but Chinese companies have zero problems operating in western countries. It’s completely unfair and if we follow this to conclusion, the future will be one of only Chinese international corporations. Would WeChat or TikTok even exist if the Chinese market were open to existing western chat and social media software?? Unlikely. If China wants their companies to be able to access western markets then they must allow western companies to access their markets. Quite frankly, the entire western world should be banding together to oppose this nonsense from China. We should outright ban any goods or technology that originates in China until China changes its behavior and opens its economy.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- kgersen 6y agoBut seen from Europe, your 'western world' = mainly USA ... which "existing western chat and social media" aren't from the US ?
- TheJoeDonger 6y agoGood, the US should reciprocate the treatment it receives from China.
- patcon 6y agoI feel like the underlying third variable in this whole thread rests in the question, "Have you or your company ever accepted or considered Chinese investment?" I would absolutely love to know how many of these folks saying "We need to uphold Western open values and not reciprocally punish" have business entanglements with Chinese funds.
- hnxx 6y agoI know much of western people agree with Trump's decision to ban ByteDance and Wechat, and it's fair to me when it's based on reciprocal. But actually, ByteDance and Wechat(Tencent Holding) was and is growing more like a US company then a company with China Communism background. A lot of employee of ByteDance/Wechat are engineers like the engineers in hackernews. Even the CEO of bytedance, Zhangyiming, is now cursed in China for earlier friendly voice to US and western world. I mean, why hurt the companies and engineers are or was friendly to US. The recently ban action is turning friend to enemy, why not put the punishment to other unfriendly subject or entity.
- nojvek 6y agoI’ll be impressed when US says we’re not depending on China to manufacture and instead bringing the big dogs like Apple and the Fashion behemoths to US. We want a net export to China instead of a net import. At-least a resilient manufacturing industry.
- tehjoker 6y agoEvery step they take to distance the population from Chinese products makes the next steps towards heightened conflict easier for the government. China isn't an enemy of the US people, only of our elites. Part of what they're doing is protectionism for US buisness, which is funny because when US business is strong they promote zero trade barriers so that the "free market" means total domination by US interests. Part of what they're doing is creating a foreign enemy so they can blame the grotesque failures of the government on external enemies in an election year (both Rs and Ds).
- WC3w6pXxgGd 6y agoIt is not the proper role of government to get involved in the economy. Separation of economics and State is just as important as separation of church and State.
- jimbob45 6y agoConspiracy theory: this is being spun as an anti-US move despite being totally sensible with precedent. We did literally the same thing with Grindr. Why would we not do the same on a platform full of CP?
- kerng 6y agoAlthough the focus of the discussion seems about TikTok, what really should get more attentions WeChat and Tencent - this is basically the only way one can communicate in modern fashion with people in China.
- rchaud 6y agoI don't see why the executive order can't simply be to compel Apple and Google to display warnings on the download page, or one when the app launches. They already do thisshould you dare to install something that originated outside of their walled garden. Let the consumer make the choice whether to use it or not. The case against Huawei at least has merit; protectionist policies against threats to strategically important industries (telecom infrastructure) has numerous precedents. This just seems like a favour to Zuckerberg after he gave the all-clear to unfettered lying in political ads. Surely that would have no impact on "national security, foreign policy and the economy".
- rollschild 6y agoLet's face it: it has nothing to do with "treat people the way they treat you." It's just Trump trying to win/secure the votes from his loyal supporters. Does TikTok grab user data and analyze them for ads, recommendations, etc? Sure, so do Instagram. But does TikTok send those data back to Chinese government so that it would potentially threaten U.S. national security? We need proof, but so far none. Here's an article of French hacker Elliot Alderson (@fs0c131y) analyzing TikTok code: https://medium.com/@fs0c131y/tiktok-logs-logs-logs-e93e8162647a https://medium.com/@fs0c131y/tiktok-logs-logs-logs-e93e81626... So IMHO the two real reasons Trumps banned TikTok and WeChat are: 1. His supporters are mad that everything is made in China. It violates some basic economics principles but that's fine. 2. What happened to that Oklahoma rally, Trump really took it personal. This ban put hundreds of thousands of Chinese people (including those who are already U.S. citizens or green card holders) in the U.S. to a difficult position. They don't have other ways to communicate with there friends/families in China other than WeChat. But I guess, those people (including myself), are the least important factors Trump worries about, if he even cares at all.
- MrStonedOne 6y ago> But does TikTok send those data back to Chinese government so that it would potentially threaten U.S. national security? We need proof, but so far none. How about the No place to hide laws that mandate this? Proof enough for you?
- WillistheWillow 6y agoTrump doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. China is creating a social credit system that exerts a ridiculous amount on control over its citizens, and spies on their every move. Who in their right mind doesn't think that they would force TikTok to do the same on global citizens - not to mention manipulate them with propaganda. Not to mention that whole imprisonment, torture, enslavement, and sterilization of the entire Turkic Uighur population. The real question is why do we tolerate ANYTHING Chinese?
- ken47 6y agoNo one forced American corporations to do business with China. America's current lack of "greatness" is America's own fault. There is a nonzero chance that America is going to face serious economic distress in the coming decade. Those who made poor leadership decisions for America's economy are desperate to find a scapegoat. No one forced American corporations to do business with China.
- president 6y agoYour scapegoat narrative is an unproductive one and apologist at worst. As usual, people are getting wrapped up in the "America bad" trope while ignoring the fact that there are real people being targeted and having their lives tracked and terrorized by the Chinese government. I don't know what country you're from but if someone was behaving badly in your house, I would be kicking them out too. You'd have to be stupid to let a burglar in your house and offer them a room.
- ken47 6y agoI'm definitely not a China apologist. This story would be a comedy if it were not a tragedy.
- smattiso 6y agoWe needed to do this 10 years ago. If China doesn't open up their economy to us then we shouldn't open up ours to them. Otherwise in 50 years China will have ripped off all of our ideas sold them to a captive audience of 1 billion users, and then used that forced customer based as a springboard to compete on the global stage. The same thing has happened with our manufacturing techniques that we outsourced to them and now look how that is kicking us in the ass. Globalism is great for a time, but eventually we need to maintain the infrastructure to actually build our own stuff, otherwise it's not sustainable. I hate Trump, but unfortunately we needed someone like him to do this. I don't think any other politician would have done anything about this. Not sure how to feel about that.
- ProAm 6y agoDoes anyone think Facebook is requesting for this to happen? Trump and Zuckerberg are friends (on friendly terms anyways). Trump needs Facebook for reelection purposes, Facebook is losing users to TikTok. Seems like a win-win for these two to team up like this? A little quid pro quo?
- live_video 6y agoWouldn't there be some value in decentralizing social media? Surely, countries where most of their users are communicating via Facebook puts them at extreme disadvantage, especially if they need FB to comply with some sort of subpoena. We don't really have global central news networks, so why would we ever think global social media platforms would ever work? Plus decentralizing social media could possibly help with bot/hatespeech/fakenews problems, or at least localize them a bit more to reduce the speed and scale problem.
- swordsmith 6y agoWechat is used by a vast majority of overseas Chinese (and increasingly non-Chinese as well), and a lot of the employees would message each other about work matters over WeChat because of convenience. All these messages are routed through Tencent's Chinese servers.
- ngcc_hk 6y agoIt is fair. If both sides can be in ... but now only China can be in, influence the media, use $ to buy and work with USA firm in USA etc. etc. But not USA. It is so one sided that China will win only in the arrangement. Time to restructure. It is time!
- c789a123 6y agoPhotos of the CCP community in these so called companies: https://twitter.com/hnjhj/status/1291906465775509506/photo/1 https://twitter.com/hnjhj/status/1291906465775509506/photo/1