10 ms·

But 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 s

by ejanus 6y ago

But 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 ago
It'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]
PikachuEXE 6y ago
Agreed. It's the China government started the trend of banning apps from foreign countries so that their own companies can grow and spread outside China. I see this ban as a late but fair move.
- crawlcrawler 6y ago
  >> I see this ban as a late but fair move. A late but fair move to achieve what, exactly?
  - rtx 6y ago
    Maybe to show benefits of natural law.
    - crawlcrawler 6y ago
      What are the benefits? In this context they are not clear to me. "If you punch me in the face then, later, I'll punch _you_ in the face". This type of behavior may be par for the course in USA but how is it good for humanity?
      - ooobit2 6y ago
        I've been asking the same question about Black Lives Matter causing hundreds of millions of dollars in property damage.
      - crawlcrawler 6y ago
        May I offer my apologies for saying the USA act violent and dominant. You're not all violent and dominant. I'm sorry. Friends?
  - TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
    “Tit for tat”. Not saying whether I agree or not, just saying that it is, according to at least some people, a reason in and of itself.
  - rorykoehler 6y ago
    Reduce CCP's influence on the world.
    - chrischen 6y ago
      CCP basically equals China and for most intents and purposes, Chinese people. Limiting their influence is just a way of saying to limit the rise and influence of China and the companies/people there, because there's no way for any Chinese person or company that has vested interests in the market there to escape the accusations and comply with any demands from the West except to completely cease operation of business there. Any person from China, or company from China, can simply be canceled by saying "they are a subject of the communist party."
      - eloisius 6y ago
        Nope. You don’t get to use false equivalence to conflate CCP with all Chinese people. You can’t equate adversity towards the Communist Party as an attack on all Chinese people. It’s sad that their government has such authoritarian control that it works that way, but it’s the Chinese people’s problem to solve if their government causes unacceptable consequences for them.
      - rorykoehler 6y ago
        China is far older than the cancer of the CCP and the Chinese people will cut that cancer out eventually. The CCP have been doing it to everyone else and their own for years. The difference is they go to far greater extremes to cancel everything and everyone who doesn't tow the party line. They deserve what's coming to them.
        chrischen 6y ago
        Regardless of how or why, the CCP has majority support by its citizens, even if you as a foreign national disagree. Even if they do not have democracy, they can still vote with their complacency.
        6y ago
- est 6y ago
  > I see this ban as a late but fair move. Governments ban apps at will? Sounds like a Communist Regime move.
greatpatton 6y ago
US companies are not forbidden to operate, they don't want to comply with Chinese surveillance laws... Apple who decided to comply indirectly by letting a Chinese company manage the data, is offering all their services there. This is a public image question for Western world companies more than anything.
- makomk 6y ago
  The whole reason Apple let a Chinese company manage their customers' data is because the Chinese government changed the law to forbid them operate those kind of cloud services for Chinese customers themselves, the same reason other companies like Amazon have to let Chinese companies run their version of AWS: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-apple-icloud-insight/apple-moves-to-store-icloud-keys-in-china-raising-human-rights-fears-idUSKCN1G8060 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-apple-icloud-insigh... "In a statement, Apple said it had to comply with recently introduced Chinese laws that require cloud services offered to Chinese citizens be operated by Chinese companies and that the data be stored in China. It said that while the company’s values don’t change in different parts of the world, it is subject to each country’s laws." Also note how the Chinese government effectively set up and runs this company, so the government more or less forced Apple to give their Chinese operations to them.
gdoptimizer 6y ago
This is just wishful thinking in the current situation. Don’t expect Chinese government to reverse what it has been doing for years in this political shitshow. Chinese living in US are unfortunately sandwiched in the between and helpless.
akg_67 6y ago
I guess, like China, USA is becoming authoritarian state. It is not about reciprocity. USA was considered the beacon of success and role model compared to China. Recent actions by USA justify other countries to do the same against foreign products and services. USA has no leg to stand on when other countries block US products and services. Good luck creating new Apple, Google, and Facebook scale companies.
wonnage 6y ago
Yeah, show them the power of the free world by checks notes banning all their apps, which is only constitutionally possible because the app stores are controlled by two American companies, and the ban technically works on the companies rather than banning the apps directly, proving the value of a sophisticated Western legal system!!!
- himinlomax 6y ago
  You can't show them anything anyway, it's all censored there.
- kortilla 6y ago
  What do two companies have to do with constitutionality?
pishpash 6y ago
And how does following suit not in fact ratify the business model because now banning on security grounds is legitimate? (Note that nowhere is the justification or condition stated to be one of reciprocal market access.) Isn't it interesting that there are laws on the books and authority vested in a single man to do this already? If this isn't struck down by the courts, then it just shows to the world, not for the first time, that America's vaunted values are a pretty thin veneer, conveniently discarded when it suits.
tobias3 6y ago
China does it, so it is okay for us to do it is just a very weak defense of this behaviour for us looking at this from outside of China and the US. The US stood for free markets, democracy and human rights and (at least) pretended to make international decisions based on those values. Now the fig leaf is gone and it is clear that those are mostly used to make transactions to US benefit even if it comes at the cost to others. If you value something like free markets, you stand by it even if it comes at a cost in the near future. If opaque TikTok recommendation engines are a problem, maybe regulate them in a way that solves the problem in general? That would hurt Youtube, Facebook and co. but it also would make the EU more comfortable in the negotiation for the Privacy Shield successor.
- jatins 6y ago
  US banning Chineese apps is an anti-China move and not an anti-free market move. An anti free market move would be protecting their own companies against all global competition, irrespective of country.
  - CloudNetworking 6y ago
    They are protecting their own companies against all global competition, irrespective of country. It just happens that only China represents a serious threat to US hegemony in this market. Edit: This comment was being voted positively (+4) until the US folks started to wake up (now sitting at 0) :)
    - what_ever 6y ago
      +4 to 0 is not THAT much of a difference to be called out tbh. So not sure if it tells you enough about US folks starting to wake up.
  - pishpash 6y ago
    It is both, and in its arbitrary application, it's even worse than a purely anti-free-market move, because it's not even principled. Isolationism and domestic protectionism, if those were the given reasons, would at least be principled.
megous 6y ago
The problem is lack of use of open protocols, not any single company in particular. Having to sign up with FB or Google to be able to chat with people there is really no different to me (and it was not always the case in case of Goolgle). At least in case of Google, I can still send e-mails to Google accounts from anywhere. This business model was allowed to continue in US, and now I can't communicate with Google users as I could in the past via jabber.
chrischen 6y ago
This is nonsensical. Even if China bans American social media apps for no reason, that's no reason for us to copy their authoritarian, speech-suppressing tactics. That being said, China levies rules on foreign companies that are levied across all companies, and some foreign companies don't want to play by those rules. That's totally different from an outright ban based on "national security." Just think about it, how is Wechat/TikTok supposed to even comply with US demands? It's clearly a political move. Plus, Wechat users in American know they're being watched by the communist party, whereas Facebook users don't even know how much they're being watched by the US government...
- ghostwriter 6y ago
  > Even if China bans American social media apps for no reason, that's no reason for us to copy their authoritarian, speech-suppressing tactics. There absolutely is a valid reason to be authoritarian towards authoritarians. They get what they preach and deserve. It is the same principle of morality of an action of self-defense, when a physical force is applied on those who initiated a physical force in the first place.
throw33432 6y ago
I recall that FB, Twitter, and Google were all available in China at one point, but they left because they didn’t want to follow China’s information and data laws.
- markus_zhang 6y ago
  yeah and fb and google still have ads revenue from China

by ejanus 6y ago

peacefulhat 6y ago

It'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]

PikachuEXE 6y ago

Agreed. It's the China government started the trend of banning apps from foreign countries so that their own companies can grow and spread outside China. I see this ban as a late but fair move.

crawlcrawler 6y ago
>> I see this ban as a late but fair move. A late but fair move to achieve what, exactly?
- rtx 6y ago
  Maybe to show benefits of natural law.
  - crawlcrawler 6y ago
    What are the benefits? In this context they are not clear to me. "If you punch me in the face then, later, I'll punch _you_ in the face". This type of behavior may be par for the course in USA but how is it good for humanity?
    - ooobit2 6y ago
      I've been asking the same question about Black Lives Matter causing hundreds of millions of dollars in property damage.
    - crawlcrawler 6y ago
      May I offer my apologies for saying the USA act violent and dominant. You're not all violent and dominant. I'm sorry. Friends?
- TheSpiceIsLife 6y ago
  “Tit for tat”. Not saying whether I agree or not, just saying that it is, according to at least some people, a reason in and of itself.
- rorykoehler 6y ago
  Reduce CCP's influence on the world.
  - chrischen 6y ago
    CCP basically equals China and for most intents and purposes, Chinese people. Limiting their influence is just a way of saying to limit the rise and influence of China and the companies/people there, because there's no way for any Chinese person or company that has vested interests in the market there to escape the accusations and comply with any demands from the West except to completely cease operation of business there. Any person from China, or company from China, can simply be canceled by saying "they are a subject of the communist party."
    - eloisius 6y ago
      Nope. You don’t get to use false equivalence to conflate CCP with all Chinese people. You can’t equate adversity towards the Communist Party as an attack on all Chinese people. It’s sad that their government has such authoritarian control that it works that way, but it’s the Chinese people’s problem to solve if their government causes unacceptable consequences for them.
    - rorykoehler 6y ago
      China is far older than the cancer of the CCP and the Chinese people will cut that cancer out eventually. The CCP have been doing it to everyone else and their own for years. The difference is they go to far greater extremes to cancel everything and everyone who doesn't tow the party line. They deserve what's coming to them.
      - chrischen 6y ago
        Regardless of how or why, the CCP has majority support by its citizens, even if you as a foreign national disagree. Even if they do not have democracy, they can still vote with their complacency.
        6y ago
est 6y ago
> I see this ban as a late but fair move. Governments ban apps at will? Sounds like a Communist Regime move.

greatpatton 6y ago

US companies are not forbidden to operate, they don't want to comply with Chinese surveillance laws... Apple who decided to comply indirectly by letting a Chinese company manage the data, is offering all their services there. This is a public image question for Western world companies more than anything.

makomk 6y ago
The whole reason Apple let a Chinese company manage their customers' data is because the Chinese government changed the law to forbid them operate those kind of cloud services for Chinese customers themselves, the same reason other companies like Amazon have to let Chinese companies run their version of AWS: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-apple-icloud-insight/apple-moves-to-store-icloud-keys-in-china-raising-human-rights-fears-idUSKCN1G8060 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-apple-icloud-insigh... "In a statement, Apple said it had to comply with recently introduced Chinese laws that require cloud services offered to Chinese citizens be operated by Chinese companies and that the data be stored in China. It said that while the company’s values don’t change in different parts of the world, it is subject to each country’s laws." Also note how the Chinese government effectively set up and runs this company, so the government more or less forced Apple to give their Chinese operations to them.

gdoptimizer 6y ago

This is just wishful thinking in the current situation. Don’t expect Chinese government to reverse what it has been doing for years in this political shitshow. Chinese living in US are unfortunately sandwiched in the between and helpless.

akg_67 6y ago

I guess, like China, USA is becoming authoritarian state. It is not about reciprocity. USA was considered the beacon of success and role model compared to China. Recent actions by USA justify other countries to do the same against foreign products and services. USA has no leg to stand on when other countries block US products and services. Good luck creating new Apple, Google, and Facebook scale companies.

wonnage 6y ago

Yeah, show them the power of the free world by checks notes banning all their apps, which is only constitutionally possible because the app stores are controlled by two American companies, and the ban technically works on the companies rather than banning the apps directly, proving the value of a sophisticated Western legal system!!!

himinlomax 6y ago
You can't show them anything anyway, it's all censored there.
kortilla 6y ago
What do two companies have to do with constitutionality?

pishpash 6y ago

And how does following suit not in fact ratify the business model because now banning on security grounds is legitimate? (Note that nowhere is the justification or condition stated to be one of reciprocal market access.) Isn't it interesting that there are laws on the books and authority vested in a single man to do this already? If this isn't struck down by the courts, then it just shows to the world, not for the first time, that America's vaunted values are a pretty thin veneer, conveniently discarded when it suits.

tobias3 6y ago

China does it, so it is okay for us to do it is just a very weak defense of this behaviour for us looking at this from outside of China and the US. The US stood for free markets, democracy and human rights and (at least) pretended to make international decisions based on those values. Now the fig leaf is gone and it is clear that those are mostly used to make transactions to US benefit even if it comes at the cost to others. If you value something like free markets, you stand by it even if it comes at a cost in the near future. If opaque TikTok recommendation engines are a problem, maybe regulate them in a way that solves the problem in general? That would hurt Youtube, Facebook and co. but it also would make the EU more comfortable in the negotiation for the Privacy Shield successor.

jatins 6y ago
US banning Chineese apps is an anti-China move and not an anti-free market move. An anti free market move would be protecting their own companies against all global competition, irrespective of country.
- CloudNetworking 6y ago
  They are protecting their own companies against all global competition, irrespective of country. It just happens that only China represents a serious threat to US hegemony in this market. Edit: This comment was being voted positively (+4) until the US folks started to wake up (now sitting at 0) :)
  - what_ever 6y ago
    +4 to 0 is not THAT much of a difference to be called out tbh. So not sure if it tells you enough about US folks starting to wake up.
- pishpash 6y ago
  It is both, and in its arbitrary application, it's even worse than a purely anti-free-market move, because it's not even principled. Isolationism and domestic protectionism, if those were the given reasons, would at least be principled.

megous 6y ago

The problem is lack of use of open protocols, not any single company in particular. Having to sign up with FB or Google to be able to chat with people there is really no different to me (and it was not always the case in case of Goolgle). At least in case of Google, I can still send e-mails to Google accounts from anywhere. This business model was allowed to continue in US, and now I can't communicate with Google users as I could in the past via jabber.

chrischen 6y ago

This is nonsensical. Even if China bans American social media apps for no reason, that's no reason for us to copy their authoritarian, speech-suppressing tactics. That being said, China levies rules on foreign companies that are levied across all companies, and some foreign companies don't want to play by those rules. That's totally different from an outright ban based on "national security." Just think about it, how is Wechat/TikTok supposed to even comply with US demands? It's clearly a political move. Plus, Wechat users in American know they're being watched by the communist party, whereas Facebook users don't even know how much they're being watched by the US government...

ghostwriter 6y ago
> Even if China bans American social media apps for no reason, that's no reason for us to copy their authoritarian, speech-suppressing tactics. There absolutely is a valid reason to be authoritarian towards authoritarians. They get what they preach and deserve. It is the same principle of morality of an action of self-defense, when a physical force is applied on those who initiated a physical force in the first place.

throw33432 6y ago

I recall that FB, Twitter, and Google were all available in China at one point, but they left because they didn’t want to follow China’s information and data laws.

markus_zhang 6y ago
yeah and fb and google still have ads revenue from China