8 ms·

So if the problem is that TikTok is gathering too much invasive data on US citizens (and supposedly siphoning it to China), and their defence is basically "So w

So if the problem is that TikTok is gathering too much invasive data on US citizens (and supposedly siphoning it to China), and their defence is basically "So what, it's legal and everyone else is doing it too!", then isn't the obvious solution making actual digital privacy legislation that would make such data vacuuming illegal? That would solve the problem and make the American market a fair playing field rather than this hamfisted protectionism.

DetroitThrow 6y ago
I sure hope they would, but I'm increasing cynical about the US's ability to legislate on this issue though.
sbmthakur 6y ago
One difference between TikTok and other companies is that they are backed by an entity which has plans for global dominance and are not exactly aligned with American interests.
- rjtavares 6y ago
  Facebook is a company that has plans for (and has achieved) global dominance and is not aligned with European interests. Boeing is a company backed by an entity which has plans for (and has achieved) global dominance and is increasingly not aligned with European interests. I know there's a huge difference between the US Government and the Chinese Government, but that difference is decreasing. And Facebook, well I simply do not trust them. Honestly, I fear what this is leading to.
  - xuki 6y ago
    FB is an asshole but it's OUR asshole. How dare you? /s
  - abc-xyz 6y ago
    It’s no secret that the EU want to achieve technological sovereignty. It seems like it would be a good thing if you didn’t have these billion-user social networks, operated by foreign entities that are likely to use them to spread propaganda, censorship, election interference, etc.
    - rjtavares 6y ago
      It would be an even better thing if supra-national entities (huge companies) had to deal with multi-national entities. That would level the playing field. Countries competing for the attention of monopolistic companies will just provoke a tranfer of wealth from the citizens of all countries to those companies (see: tax havens).
  - jorvi 6y ago
    > Boeing is a company backed by an entity which has plans for (and has achieved) global dominance and is increasingly not aligned with European interests. Airbus and Boeing pretty much go toe-to-toe, no? Also Boeing still has the very possible abandoning of the 787-Max and the WTO dispute resolution (that still hasn’t been implemented) looming over them.
    - ChuckNorris89 6y ago
      >Airbus and Boeing pretty much go toe-to-toe, no? Except for the part where the NSA is doing political and industrial espionage on Airbus on behalf of Boeing and the US gov so they can throw a wrench in Airbus's negotiations with other governments.
    - seanmcdirmid 6y ago
      737 Max, the 787 is still doing quite well.
  - vorpalhex 6y ago
    But Facebook isn't backed by the US government given that we keep pulling them in front of congress and now the executive is making an attack on Section 230. That's not to say that FB isn't globally dominant - just that it isn't propped up by any country, and it'd certainly be fair to punish them for breaking or flouting rules. Boeing as a company producing a massive amount of planes for the EU is absolutely aligned with European interests. Their current scandal is also a scandal in the US and they've also been (and continue to be) punished and investigated for it. You can't just say "but Facebook!" in response to TikTok, a company siphoning data into a blackhole in China at the behest of the CCP and engaging in censoring as befits the CCP. The current status quo hurts everyone whether in the US or the EU.
  - sbmthakur 6y ago
    I don't know how Facebook and Boeing are comparable to the entity I was talking about. These companies don't have an army under them, are not running indoctrination camps and are not in border disputes with numerous countries.
- buran77 6y ago
  > they are backed by an entity which has plans for global dominance and are not exactly aligned with American interests The irony is that each of the entities has plans for global dominance, which is incompatible with the plans and interests the other one has. The sad part is that it turns out the US is willing to forgo its values if this gives them a leg up on China. Makes any future rhetoric on values and morals seem a bit empty. * * It has been pointed out that perhaps "empty rhetoric" wasn't the best choice of words. Maybe "rhetoric that no longer has any basis in reality whatsoever" sums it up better.
  - endogui 6y ago
    Rhetoric about US values has been empty since Guantanamo Bay started housing "foreign militants". Europe seems to be the only place in the West where a commitment to human rights is sincere.
    - zeckalpha 6y ago
      It started long before that.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - bzb4 6y ago
      There’s no right to free speech in Europe, since for example many countries have laws against blasphemy.
      - mmrezaie 6y ago
        Like where in Europe?
        zo1 6y ago
        UK for starters. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_and_Religious_Hatred_Act_2006 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_and_Religious_Hatred_Ac... Blasphemy laws have just been repackaged essentially under "anti hate speech" laws. They're palatable to the media and at the same time selectively-applicable which is ideal for population control.
catsarebetter 6y ago
Ah interesting, I think I remember Congress asking the tech CEOs if China stole data from the us shortly before the tik tok announcement, I wonder if there's a connection there. But we use a ton of Chinese tech software and hardware outside of Tiktok, are they gonna ban them all?
- pulse7 6y ago
  A lost of Chinese hardware today doesn't send data back to China. An exception to that are mobile phones for some of which it has been proven to send data to China.
  - MagnumOpus 6y ago
    > An exception to that are mobile phones And tablets. And routers. And smart TVs. Which basically encompasses pretty much all of the network-connected appliances in the average home. (And even if a "a lost" of the rest of IoT devices don't, would you want to bet your data security on it?)
squarefoot 6y ago
That is not the problem. I'm not a US citizen, but let's pretend I am; as a normal citizen (ie, not a politician or high profile important person) would I be more concerned about my personal data being sent to a foreign country who doesn't know me, my family, my job, and very likely will never give a damn about what i think, or rather my own government who has all interests to know what I think, especially during protests? I have zero trust in Chinese government, but if I had to choose, even as the European citizen I am (not high profile, not employed in critical areas etc.), I'd rather send my data to China than to my own government.
- splintercell 6y ago
  China doesn't care about you because you're not a good target, you want to know who is a good Target? Chinese people living in your country, they can be blackmailed into doing things against the interests of your government.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- frequentnapper 6y ago
  unless you happened to criticize the chinese govt and travelled via hong kong at a later date.
- x86_64Ubuntu 6y ago
  You make it sound like you are forced to download the app at gunpoint.
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    In order to exist as functional part of modern society you pretty much have to be on at least a couple apps that exfiltrate all your data and metadata. Sure you can DIY everything but that comes with a huge time cost that most simply cannot afford. The point out preferring one's data in the hands of a regime that doesn't have jurisdiction to send jack booted thugs to kick in one's door still stands.
newacct583 6y ago
> isn't the obvious solution making actual digital privacy legislation No, because that isn't the solution to the problem being addressed. The administration doesn't want to protect privacy. It wants to ban TikTok.
cwhiz 6y ago
You can’t have a fair playing field with China unless they also have a fair playing field with the US. That has not ever been the case. China wants to have cake and eat cake.
- norswap 6y ago
  Not the point. OP is talking about playing field between companies not countries. He's saying "TikTok should not gather invasive data ... neither should US-based company". If you oppose that, then you're basically saying "the US wants to have cake and eat it too". I guess every country for itself "works"... for a certain definition of "works". Let's avoid regression to Chinese standard please.
- deepGem 6y ago
  Am quite surprised and quite honestly shocked that it took this long for US or any country to recognize this fact. It's not just a fair playing field war between US and China, but between China and rest of the world. Even India, whose companies are not allowed to operate in China under fair play rules banned TikTok only after the Chinese incursion across the LOC. I really don't know what to make of this.
IgorPartola 6y ago
Have you met the American legislative process? This is the same country that when, for example, faced with stiff competition in the motorcycle market from Japanese manufacturers in the 1980s didn't start producing better and cheaper bikes, but instead just added a huge tariff on imported bikes over 700cc in order to boost Harley up. Why would this be any different? Besides, this move isn't coming from the actual concern for citizens' and residents' privacy. It comes from the idea that economy and pandemic and terrible polling numbers for Trump mean he needs a distraction, as per his usual pattern. It was TikTok but it could have been catalytic converters or grandmothers or anything, just to get people talking about something else.
curiousllama 6y ago
The problem isn't digital privacy; it's a fair bit more complex than that. Tech lenses aren't a great way to view geopolitics. The US' international economic dominance is predicated on a (1) pronounced lead in certain industries and (2) a simply massive economy, which combine to (3) let the US set the rules of international "fair play." The US is where you find the thing you want to buy, and the people you want to sell to. You want access? Play by our rules - everywhere. Tik Tok does not just threaten US data. It threatens our lead in a critical industry (1), and comes from a country that minimizes the impact of US economic might (2), meaning that China can set their own rules of "fair play" (3). Banning Tik Tok isn't to protect US data; that's totally missing the point. It's to protect the American ability to set international norms. From that lens, this is certainly hamfisted, and I certainly don't believe views it like this, but you can damn well bet the policy nerd drafting this EO is thinking this way.
- Joker_vD 6y ago
  There was an old Soviet joke that "the USA meddles in the USSR's internal affairs all over the globe"... and yeah, the "policy nerds" apparently do honestly believe that the whole world is in the US's jurisdiction, but what can you realistically do?
  - curiousllama 6y ago
    I'm totally stealing that joke. Love soviet political humor.
- CerealFounder 6y ago
  You;'re right, but I think you're seeing China finally being taken seriously for the future and with that comes and expectation of reciprocity of commerce. If you want to fight to be the most important economy/culture you no longer can ask up to bring a knife to a gun fight.
- specialp 6y ago
  Well if the current state is zero due process in China, and no ability for US companies to participate in their social media market, then yes their companies should have equal treatment. I don't agree with this just on fiat from Trump, but the USA is in its rights to give Chinese the same sort of treatment that they give the USA. If you don't play by China's rules you can't be in their market, and those rules are set up to benefit China only. In this case TikTok is getting the same treatment US tech giants have. If that is not "fair play" I don't know what is.
nafizh 6y ago
How is it a fair playing field if US companies can't do business in China, and Chinese companies can do in US?
- ictebres 6y ago
  Well you can’t assume a fair playing field between USA and any other country, let alone a developing one. They needed protectionist measures to be able to industrialize as well as they did.
- throw44532 6y ago
  They can. They just need to comply with China’s data and censorship laws. It’s why Microsoft and Apple are available in China.
  - Aunche 6y ago
    Technically, that's true, but it never really works that way. Google had complied with their laws, but got hacked. Foreign websites will get shut down randomly without warning or explanation. Sometimes they'll get restored, but even then the damage is already done. iTunes is still banned in China.
    - wwwwwwwww 6y ago
      No, even technically, it is wrong. Here is a Google example from when I lived in China: Google was at the time competing with Baidu over the search image market in China. My home internet was fast and with great quality. Only Google image search results had very often problems loading image previews. Its not that it "didn't work". It just failed "a little", maybe half the images in the results pag didn't load. So Google image search wasn't really blocked. It could have been total coincidence that it was like that for years and only for Google image search. The site that was coincidentally competing over the lead in the Chinese search market against a Chinese company. After some weeks, I started using Baidu image search, even though their result quality was worse. But at least it worked. I am sure many people in China did. That's "competition" in China.
  - 6y ago

DetroitThrow 6y ago

I sure hope they would, but I'm increasing cynical about the US's ability to legislate on this issue though.

sbmthakur 6y ago

One difference between TikTok and other companies is that they are backed by an entity which has plans for global dominance and are not exactly aligned with American interests.

rjtavares 6y ago
Facebook is a company that has plans for (and has achieved) global dominance and is not aligned with European interests. Boeing is a company backed by an entity which has plans for (and has achieved) global dominance and is increasingly not aligned with European interests. I know there's a huge difference between the US Government and the Chinese Government, but that difference is decreasing. And Facebook, well I simply do not trust them. Honestly, I fear what this is leading to.
- xuki 6y ago
  FB is an asshole but it's OUR asshole. How dare you? /s
- abc-xyz 6y ago
  It’s no secret that the EU want to achieve technological sovereignty. It seems like it would be a good thing if you didn’t have these billion-user social networks, operated by foreign entities that are likely to use them to spread propaganda, censorship, election interference, etc.
  - rjtavares 6y ago
    It would be an even better thing if supra-national entities (huge companies) had to deal with multi-national entities. That would level the playing field. Countries competing for the attention of monopolistic companies will just provoke a tranfer of wealth from the citizens of all countries to those companies (see: tax havens).
- jorvi 6y ago
  > Boeing is a company backed by an entity which has plans for (and has achieved) global dominance and is increasingly not aligned with European interests. Airbus and Boeing pretty much go toe-to-toe, no? Also Boeing still has the very possible abandoning of the 787-Max and the WTO dispute resolution (that still hasn’t been implemented) looming over them.
  - ChuckNorris89 6y ago
    >Airbus and Boeing pretty much go toe-to-toe, no? Except for the part where the NSA is doing political and industrial espionage on Airbus on behalf of Boeing and the US gov so they can throw a wrench in Airbus's negotiations with other governments.
  - seanmcdirmid 6y ago
    737 Max, the 787 is still doing quite well.
- vorpalhex 6y ago
  But Facebook isn't backed by the US government given that we keep pulling them in front of congress and now the executive is making an attack on Section 230. That's not to say that FB isn't globally dominant - just that it isn't propped up by any country, and it'd certainly be fair to punish them for breaking or flouting rules. Boeing as a company producing a massive amount of planes for the EU is absolutely aligned with European interests. Their current scandal is also a scandal in the US and they've also been (and continue to be) punished and investigated for it. You can't just say "but Facebook!" in response to TikTok, a company siphoning data into a blackhole in China at the behest of the CCP and engaging in censoring as befits the CCP. The current status quo hurts everyone whether in the US or the EU.
- sbmthakur 6y ago
  I don't know how Facebook and Boeing are comparable to the entity I was talking about. These companies don't have an army under them, are not running indoctrination camps and are not in border disputes with numerous countries.
buran77 6y ago
> they are backed by an entity which has plans for global dominance and are not exactly aligned with American interests The irony is that each of the entities has plans for global dominance, which is incompatible with the plans and interests the other one has. The sad part is that it turns out the US is willing to forgo its values if this gives them a leg up on China. Makes any future rhetoric on values and morals seem a bit empty. * * It has been pointed out that perhaps "empty rhetoric" wasn't the best choice of words. Maybe "rhetoric that no longer has any basis in reality whatsoever" sums it up better.
- endogui 6y ago
  Rhetoric about US values has been empty since Guantanamo Bay started housing "foreign militants". Europe seems to be the only place in the West where a commitment to human rights is sincere.
  - zeckalpha 6y ago
    It started long before that.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - bzb4 6y ago
    There’s no right to free speech in Europe, since for example many countries have laws against blasphemy.
    - mmrezaie 6y ago
      Like where in Europe?
      - zo1 6y ago
        UK for starters. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_and_Religious_Hatred_Act_2006 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_and_Religious_Hatred_Ac... Blasphemy laws have just been repackaged essentially under "anti hate speech" laws. They're palatable to the media and at the same time selectively-applicable which is ideal for population control.

catsarebetter 6y ago

Ah interesting, I think I remember Congress asking the tech CEOs if China stole data from the us shortly before the tik tok announcement, I wonder if there's a connection there. But we use a ton of Chinese tech software and hardware outside of Tiktok, are they gonna ban them all?

pulse7 6y ago
A lost of Chinese hardware today doesn't send data back to China. An exception to that are mobile phones for some of which it has been proven to send data to China.
- MagnumOpus 6y ago
  > An exception to that are mobile phones And tablets. And routers. And smart TVs. Which basically encompasses pretty much all of the network-connected appliances in the average home. (And even if a "a lost" of the rest of IoT devices don't, would you want to bet your data security on it?)

squarefoot 6y ago

That is not the problem. I'm not a US citizen, but let's pretend I am; as a normal citizen (ie, not a politician or high profile important person) would I be more concerned about my personal data being sent to a foreign country who doesn't know me, my family, my job, and very likely will never give a damn about what i think, or rather my own government who has all interests to know what I think, especially during protests? I have zero trust in Chinese government, but if I had to choose, even as the European citizen I am (not high profile, not employed in critical areas etc.), I'd rather send my data to China than to my own government.

splintercell 6y ago
China doesn't care about you because you're not a good target, you want to know who is a good Target? Chinese people living in your country, they can be blackmailed into doing things against the interests of your government.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
frequentnapper 6y ago
unless you happened to criticize the chinese govt and travelled via hong kong at a later date.
x86_64Ubuntu 6y ago
You make it sound like you are forced to download the app at gunpoint.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  In order to exist as functional part of modern society you pretty much have to be on at least a couple apps that exfiltrate all your data and metadata. Sure you can DIY everything but that comes with a huge time cost that most simply cannot afford. The point out preferring one's data in the hands of a regime that doesn't have jurisdiction to send jack booted thugs to kick in one's door still stands.

newacct583 6y ago

> isn't the obvious solution making actual digital privacy legislation No, because that isn't the solution to the problem being addressed. The administration doesn't want to protect privacy. It wants to ban TikTok.

cwhiz 6y ago

You can’t have a fair playing field with China unless they also have a fair playing field with the US. That has not ever been the case. China wants to have cake and eat cake.

norswap 6y ago
Not the point. OP is talking about playing field between companies not countries. He's saying "TikTok should not gather invasive data ... neither should US-based company". If you oppose that, then you're basically saying "the US wants to have cake and eat it too". I guess every country for itself "works"... for a certain definition of "works". Let's avoid regression to Chinese standard please.
deepGem 6y ago
Am quite surprised and quite honestly shocked that it took this long for US or any country to recognize this fact. It's not just a fair playing field war between US and China, but between China and rest of the world. Even India, whose companies are not allowed to operate in China under fair play rules banned TikTok only after the Chinese incursion across the LOC. I really don't know what to make of this.

IgorPartola 6y ago

Have you met the American legislative process? This is the same country that when, for example, faced with stiff competition in the motorcycle market from Japanese manufacturers in the 1980s didn't start producing better and cheaper bikes, but instead just added a huge tariff on imported bikes over 700cc in order to boost Harley up. Why would this be any different? Besides, this move isn't coming from the actual concern for citizens' and residents' privacy. It comes from the idea that economy and pandemic and terrible polling numbers for Trump mean he needs a distraction, as per his usual pattern. It was TikTok but it could have been catalytic converters or grandmothers or anything, just to get people talking about something else.

curiousllama 6y ago

The problem isn't digital privacy; it's a fair bit more complex than that. Tech lenses aren't a great way to view geopolitics. The US' international economic dominance is predicated on a (1) pronounced lead in certain industries and (2) a simply massive economy, which combine to (3) let the US set the rules of international "fair play." The US is where you find the thing you want to buy, and the people you want to sell to. You want access? Play by our rules - everywhere. Tik Tok does not just threaten US data. It threatens our lead in a critical industry (1), and comes from a country that minimizes the impact of US economic might (2), meaning that China can set their own rules of "fair play" (3). Banning Tik Tok isn't to protect US data; that's totally missing the point. It's to protect the American ability to set international norms. From that lens, this is certainly hamfisted, and I certainly don't believe views it like this, but you can damn well bet the policy nerd drafting this EO is thinking this way.

Joker_vD 6y ago
There was an old Soviet joke that "the USA meddles in the USSR's internal affairs all over the globe"... and yeah, the "policy nerds" apparently do honestly believe that the whole world is in the US's jurisdiction, but what can you realistically do?
- curiousllama 6y ago
  I'm totally stealing that joke. Love soviet political humor.
CerealFounder 6y ago
You;'re right, but I think you're seeing China finally being taken seriously for the future and with that comes and expectation of reciprocity of commerce. If you want to fight to be the most important economy/culture you no longer can ask up to bring a knife to a gun fight.
specialp 6y ago
Well if the current state is zero due process in China, and no ability for US companies to participate in their social media market, then yes their companies should have equal treatment. I don't agree with this just on fiat from Trump, but the USA is in its rights to give Chinese the same sort of treatment that they give the USA. If you don't play by China's rules you can't be in their market, and those rules are set up to benefit China only. In this case TikTok is getting the same treatment US tech giants have. If that is not "fair play" I don't know what is.

nafizh 6y ago

How is it a fair playing field if US companies can't do business in China, and Chinese companies can do in US?

ictebres 6y ago
Well you can’t assume a fair playing field between USA and any other country, let alone a developing one. They needed protectionist measures to be able to industrialize as well as they did.
throw44532 6y ago
They can. They just need to comply with China’s data and censorship laws. It’s why Microsoft and Apple are available in China.
- Aunche 6y ago
  Technically, that's true, but it never really works that way. Google had complied with their laws, but got hacked. Foreign websites will get shut down randomly without warning or explanation. Sometimes they'll get restored, but even then the damage is already done. iTunes is still banned in China.
  - wwwwwwwww 6y ago
    No, even technically, it is wrong. Here is a Google example from when I lived in China: Google was at the time competing with Baidu over the search image market in China. My home internet was fast and with great quality. Only Google image search results had very often problems loading image previews. Its not that it "didn't work". It just failed "a little", maybe half the images in the results pag didn't load. So Google image search wasn't really blocked. It could have been total coincidence that it was like that for years and only for Google image search. The site that was coincidentally competing over the lead in the Chinese search market against a Chinese company. After some weeks, I started using Baidu image search, even though their result quality was worse. But at least it worked. I am sure many people in China did. That's "competition" in China.
- 6y ago