3 ms·

> Are you sure? What law does Youtube and Twitter need to follow to be allowed to operate in China? They need to start censoring content based on the Chinese g

by angio 6y ago

> Are you sure? What law does Youtube and Twitter need to follow to be allowed to operate in China? They need to start censoring content based on the Chinese government direction. That's what Microsoft, Apple are doing. > I don't view banning TikTok and WeChat as making America less free. We can just make our own. And we're only doing this to China and it's deserved. The government arbitrarily deciding what you can and cannot run on your smartphone is a limitation of your freedom. > But I don't believe that this is mutually exclusive to also banning Chinese companies due to other reasons as highlighted above. The official reason is that these two apps are spying on US citizens, so stricter privacy laws would prevent them (and other popular apps like FB, Google, Twitter, etc. so it would be an even bigger win for the people) from doing so.

ericmay 6y ago
> The government arbitrarily deciding what you can and cannot run on your smartphone is a limitation of your freedom. The government arbitrarily deciding I can't pour smoke into the air is a limitation of my freedom too. I can't buy a grenade launcher? Limitation of my freedom.
- angio 6y ago
  It's more nuanced than that. The government decided that a population with access to grenade launchers is bad and so they banned all grenade launchers. The law to ban this type of weapons was also approved by the Congress and was not an executive order. As I said, if Congress passed strict privacy laws that resulted in the ban of TikTok then there would be virtually no outcries.
  - ericmay 6y ago
    I think the mistake you're making here is assuming that the United States can only apply blanket policies to all countries and can't treat individual countries differently. Your aggregation view isn't correct in practical terms. The government (with the consent of the voters, I need to keep stressing that) decided that grenade launchers should be banned, but they didn't decide that all firearms or weapons should be banned. You can clearly see how you can pick and choose categories or different aggregation levels to take specific action on. It's like, you ban grenade launchers because you don't like the potential harmful effects. You ban Chinese companies because you don't like how the Chinese government treats your country. I think it's pretty straightforward generally speaking. We wouldn't be here if China allowed free reign for US companies to operate in China as we have for a long time allowed Chinese companies to operate in the US. We even only ask that Chinese researchers disclose their military affiliation. In China do you think they'd let US military officers work at top research universities in China? Why wouldn't they? Why should the US?
room500 6y ago
> They need to start censoring content based on the Chinese government direction. That's what Microsoft, Apple are doing. This is overly simplistic and there are a number of additional regulations in place. For example, Netflix (even if they censor) cannot enter China without partnering with a Chinese company because they cannot get a media license [1] [1] https://www.wired.com/2016/01/netflix-may-never-break-into-china/ https://www.wired.com/2016/01/netflix-may-never-break-into-c...

by angio 6y ago

ericmay 6y ago

> The government arbitrarily deciding what you can and cannot run on your smartphone is a limitation of your freedom. The government arbitrarily deciding I can't pour smoke into the air is a limitation of my freedom too. I can't buy a grenade launcher? Limitation of my freedom.

angio 6y ago
It's more nuanced than that. The government decided that a population with access to grenade launchers is bad and so they banned all grenade launchers. The law to ban this type of weapons was also approved by the Congress and was not an executive order. As I said, if Congress passed strict privacy laws that resulted in the ban of TikTok then there would be virtually no outcries.
- ericmay 6y ago
  I think the mistake you're making here is assuming that the United States can only apply blanket policies to all countries and can't treat individual countries differently. Your aggregation view isn't correct in practical terms. The government (with the consent of the voters, I need to keep stressing that) decided that grenade launchers should be banned, but they didn't decide that all firearms or weapons should be banned. You can clearly see how you can pick and choose categories or different aggregation levels to take specific action on. It's like, you ban grenade launchers because you don't like the potential harmful effects. You ban Chinese companies because you don't like how the Chinese government treats your country. I think it's pretty straightforward generally speaking. We wouldn't be here if China allowed free reign for US companies to operate in China as we have for a long time allowed Chinese companies to operate in the US. We even only ask that Chinese researchers disclose their military affiliation. In China do you think they'd let US military officers work at top research universities in China? Why wouldn't they? Why should the US?

room500 6y ago

> They need to start censoring content based on the Chinese government direction. That's what Microsoft, Apple are doing. This is overly simplistic and there are a number of additional regulations in place. For example, Netflix (even if they censor) cannot enter China without partnering with a Chinese company because they cannot get a media license [1] [1] https://www.wired.com/2016/01/netflix-may-never-break-into-china/ https://www.wired.com/2016/01/netflix-may-never-break-into-c...