4 ms·

Not sure why you’d think Facebook isn’t a national security concern for other countries. I mean in China they outright banned Facebook, and EU have ordered Face

Not sure why you’d think Facebook isn’t a national security concern for other countries. I mean in China they outright banned Facebook, and EU have ordered Facebook (and others) to restrict data sent from EU to US. The only thing unique about this case is the fact that USA might ban the app, which is fair considering China does the same to US tech companies.

rfoo 6y ago
> they outright banned Facebook For a different (and more stupid) reason though. It's not like CCP banned Facebook for sending home data, they banned Facebook for not being able to comply to censorship requirements. iCloud would be a better example here.
- wokwokwok 6y ago
  Sure; but it’s an almost irrelevant detail. The point being made is that government intervention is a given in China at every level. You can argue either way on if it’s “right” for the US to be doing it too, but it’s a bit rich to make a song and dance about how unfair it is under the circumstances. I’m 100% happy to agree governments in general, should keep out of this stuff, but that’s not the world we live in, or have lived in, for a very long time... /shrug It sucks, but it’s kind of hard to be sympathetic, honestly. You reap what you sow.
ezconnect 6y ago
What's unique about this is the US government is telling them to sell it to a US company. It would have been normal to just outright ban it for security reasons the sell it or get ban part is the scary part.
- tatersolid 6y ago
  > What's unique about this is the US government is telling them to sell it to a US company This is exactly what China does to foreign companies who wish to operate in China. The US is simply pursuing a model of reciprocal trade protections and tariffs.
  - SiempreViernes 6y ago
    The US is "simply" following the example set by a dictatorship you mean?
    - manigandham 6y ago
      Yes, towards that dictatorship.
    - mensetmanusman 6y ago
      Sometimes you have to mirror your opponent to show them they are being stupid?
      - SiempreViernes 6y ago
        Ah yes, the "If you jump off a bridge I jump off a bridge" approach to teaching.
        mensetmanusman 6y ago
        Doubt that one could seriously argue banning tiktok is jumping off a bridge.
- compsciphd 6y ago
  how do you think US companies break into china? the chinese government forces them to "sell" (i.e. "partner" where the partner is given significant concessions that would never happen without the chinese government's protection, including ownership over IP). honestly, if one views the US in a trade war with china, then there is a concept of "national security" (in a wide view of the term, I'd agree not the traditional view in the US, but probably closer to how china views the term) to allowing chinese companies access to the US market that are not reciprocated in China. heck, the fact that they want to "partner" is probably indicative of how the chinese view the issue. i.e. US companies have to have a chinese "partner" to enter china, so to do the same in the US, they seek out a US partner.
  - ezconnect 6y ago
    At least you know the rules to play before joining their game, TikTok got famous and eating into their rivals like instagram and snapchat ad revenues and the rules got changed. It's like letting foreigners invest into your market and picking the winners and forcing them to give up their work.
    - compsciphd 6y ago
      I'd agree with you, but do you think china doesn't behave this way? an example might be https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/china-coronavirus-nationalize-america-owned-car-company https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/china-coronavirus-nation... to an extent its a he-said/she-said, but if this were in the US, we would say "it's not a good look".
      - ezconnect 6y ago
        All countries behave this way as long as the decision maker can survive politically. I am just surprise about the US doing it in a blatant way and its not even technology they are going after, just a niche social app. US did bomb Libya to submission when it nationalized its oil industry, I guess politics in the US is really just controlled by the business donors.

rfoo 6y ago

> they outright banned Facebook For a different (and more stupid) reason though. It's not like CCP banned Facebook for sending home data, they banned Facebook for not being able to comply to censorship requirements. iCloud would be a better example here.

wokwokwok 6y ago
Sure; but it’s an almost irrelevant detail. The point being made is that government intervention is a given in China at every level. You can argue either way on if it’s “right” for the US to be doing it too, but it’s a bit rich to make a song and dance about how unfair it is under the circumstances. I’m 100% happy to agree governments in general, should keep out of this stuff, but that’s not the world we live in, or have lived in, for a very long time... /shrug It sucks, but it’s kind of hard to be sympathetic, honestly. You reap what you sow.

ezconnect 6y ago

What's unique about this is the US government is telling them to sell it to a US company. It would have been normal to just outright ban it for security reasons the sell it or get ban part is the scary part.

tatersolid 6y ago
> What's unique about this is the US government is telling them to sell it to a US company This is exactly what China does to foreign companies who wish to operate in China. The US is simply pursuing a model of reciprocal trade protections and tariffs.
- SiempreViernes 6y ago
  The US is "simply" following the example set by a dictatorship you mean?
  - manigandham 6y ago
    Yes, towards that dictatorship.
  - mensetmanusman 6y ago
    Sometimes you have to mirror your opponent to show them they are being stupid?
    - SiempreViernes 6y ago
      Ah yes, the "If you jump off a bridge I jump off a bridge" approach to teaching.
      - mensetmanusman 6y ago
        Doubt that one could seriously argue banning tiktok is jumping off a bridge.
compsciphd 6y ago
how do you think US companies break into china? the chinese government forces them to "sell" (i.e. "partner" where the partner is given significant concessions that would never happen without the chinese government's protection, including ownership over IP). honestly, if one views the US in a trade war with china, then there is a concept of "national security" (in a wide view of the term, I'd agree not the traditional view in the US, but probably closer to how china views the term) to allowing chinese companies access to the US market that are not reciprocated in China. heck, the fact that they want to "partner" is probably indicative of how the chinese view the issue. i.e. US companies have to have a chinese "partner" to enter china, so to do the same in the US, they seek out a US partner.
- ezconnect 6y ago
  At least you know the rules to play before joining their game, TikTok got famous and eating into their rivals like instagram and snapchat ad revenues and the rules got changed. It's like letting foreigners invest into your market and picking the winners and forcing them to give up their work.
  - compsciphd 6y ago
    I'd agree with you, but do you think china doesn't behave this way? an example might be https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/china-coronavirus-nationalize-america-owned-car-company https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/china-coronavirus-nation... to an extent its a he-said/she-said, but if this were in the US, we would say "it's not a good look".
    - ezconnect 6y ago
      All countries behave this way as long as the decision maker can survive politically. I am just surprise about the US doing it in a blatant way and its not even technology they are going after, just a niche social app. US did bomb Libya to submission when it nationalized its oil industry, I guess politics in the US is really just controlled by the business donors.