8 ms·

85% of US teenagers use tiktok. That's 85% of the future generation of US senators, Cabinet members, and Supreme Court justices, of police chiefs, civil rights

by crmd 4y ago

85% of US teenagers use tiktok. That's 85% of the future generation of US senators, Cabinet members, and Supreme Court justices, of police chiefs, civil rights activists, mayors, CEOs, etc. in their bedrooms right now consuming content curated by, and filming their lives and that of their friends, and uploading the video to data centers, that are controlled by a strategic adversary of the United States. This is, to put it lightly, a huge national security risk.

lumost 4y ago
In what world does it make sense to allow a country who blocks access to their market unrestricted access to the US market? If china is a rival to the US, why do they have one of the most favorable trade deals?
- sudosysgen 4y ago
  Because it's not true that they have unrestricted access to the US market, see Huawei, ZTE, etc... And it's not true they have one of the most favourable trade deals, many tariffs are still in effect.
  - Teever 4y ago
    But surely you see that there is a difference in how China regulates American companies operating in China and vice versa? Perhaps the US should adopt a tit for tat policy with regards to China in this matter?
    - bigcat12345678 4y ago
      What's the importance of means to an end? US rules the world through a liberal voting political propaganda; a rule-based capitalism market economy; a USD denominated financial structure. Sure, US blocked Huawei through rule of law; and you think China has no laws to block FB & Google? But behind the cloak of laws regulations, the intention of mutual exclusion is pure and same, nothing different.
- gampleman 4y ago
  One of these countries spent a century preaching to the world the benefits of free trade, the other ridding itself of the capitalist class. So the issue from the point of view of the rest of the world is that the US should practice what they preach even in the one case where that would mean allowing some mild competition to their massive and insanely profitable internet monopolies.
- SkinTaco 4y ago
  > If china is a rival to the US, why do they have one of the most favorable trade deals? I don't have an answer for you, but when you rephrase the point you're getting at it's easy to see there are plenty of valid reasons, because this is not true: > There are no reasons for the US to give a favorable trade deal to a country that is otherwise a rival
  - lumost 4y ago
    You claim you don’t have an answer, but then state that by simple rephrasing the answer is obvious? Can you specify a specific reason? There are historic examples of trade deals made for this reason such as with the Soviet Union or communist china. However I cannot think of an example where a country has given unilaterally favorable trade terms to a rival except out of fealty/tribute.
  - thrown_22 4y ago
    There is a difference between letting China export low value added products with many producers vs a literal spy in your bedroom. Is this now US policy too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTCqXlDjx18 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTCqXlDjx18
- paulcole 4y ago
  A world where we want $29 microwaves and iPhones produced 24/7 and delivered to our doorstep. People in America need China in order to keep living the lives we have.
  - jjeaff 4y ago
    I'm not so sure that is really true anymore. I think that was the case in the past, when most manufacturing was very labor intensive. But now, so much is automated that things could be made anywhere for almost as cheap. Unfortunately, the US doesn't really have the infrastructure and capabilities to do so now.
    - naavis 4y ago
      So effectively they couldn't be made just anywhere, if they can't be made in the US?
    - paulcole 4y ago
      If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we’d all have a merry christmas.
    - jpgvm 4y ago
      A long time ago it was about labour costs but that isn't been true for over 2 decades. manufacturing anywhere outside of China can't compete with China anymore because of critical mass of supply chain. You should visit Shenzen and you will quickly understand why there is no place in the world like it and why there probably never will be. Hearing that people think you can 'just' replicate Shenzen somewhere else makes me giggle. Unfortunately for the US it also goes for batteries and other green energy tech that the US turned their back on in favour of oil these past decades. You can't just replicate Xinjiang polysilicon production, without which we can't have PV solar cells, also primarily made in China. CATL is probably the largest manufacturer of EV class batteries in the world. China makes more EVs than the rest of the world many times over, etc. Now they are also leading in nuclear, rolling out 200GW of next-gen reactors, they have their own fusion experiments. They have been leading in AI research for the last 10+ years. The days of China being cheaper are long long gone. You go to China because you can get access to talent, work ethic and optimised supply chain + logistics that can't be bought anywhere else on earth for any price. That dominance isn't going to be easily displaced because it's the product of decades of investment and R&D.
- tchalla 4y ago
  In the world where US controls the petrodollar system. That world.
meowtimemania 4y ago
should be edited to be: 85% of future generation will open tiktok at least once this month
airza 4y ago
The invisible comparison you seem to be making here is to Facebook or Twitter, companies which also do not seem to have my best interests in mind.
wslh 4y ago
In a scifi tone, it is interesting to extrapolate the personality of teenagers once they take roles in future governments.
throwaway4good 4y ago
TikTok's data centers are in the US.
- Quillbert182 4y ago
  That doesn’t mean China can’t access the data, and we have no guarantees that there aren’t copies of all that data in China.
  - throwaway4good 4y ago
    Yes. What would be a good way to regulate this; still allowing open and fair competition while protecting the privacy of the broad population? So if the EU forces Facebook to store EU's citizens data in the EU. What would prevent Facebook copying that data to the US? Or have some American (potentially working for the NSA) remotely accessing EU data?
    - L0stRegulator 4y ago
      Under the US CLOUD Act, three letter agencies can compel Facebook to produce user data wherever in the world it is. When any other country has a law like that, they are obviously the bad guys.
      - throwaway29812 4y ago
        Via a transparent and public legal process. In China there is no: 1. Public legal process for data requests 2. Now that I think about it, there are no requests for data at all (they don't have to ask, it's just given) 3. Ability for any Chinese company to say no to gov requests Surely you don't view these circumstances as the same? Here is the page for the US CLOUD ACT: https://www.justice.gov/dag/cloudact https://www.justice.gov/dag/cloudact Where is the similar page detailing how the CCP balances civil rights with security?
dijit 4y ago
This might sound like a fallacious argument; but do you think the same about Europeans who consume almost exclusively US media and interact almost exclusively with US social media platforms? The US (famously) does not have Allies, only temporary allegiances. If you're discussing ties to government, Twitter and Facebook have members on their boards publicly who are sitting and/or former members of government including, at least in facebooks case: Robert Kimmitt (who was United States Ambassador to Germany from 1991 to 1993, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs from 1989 to 1991, General Counsel of the U.S. Department of the Treasury from 1985 to 1987, and National Security Council Executive Secretary and General Counsel from 1983 to 1985). Is it different rules for us in Europe? or are you suggesting that we should never have allowed this to happen? tl;dr: Why is US/China much different from EU/US or US/Japan (whom also makes a resounding impact on our technology and strongly affects our culture in the west).
- dymk 4y ago
  Yes, US/China relations are pretty distinct from US/EU relations.
  - dijit 4y ago
    Why do you think that's the case? Aside from the trade-war that's going on, which is pretty arbirary; The US has routinely spied on Europe, allowed backdoored technology to make it's way into the continent including to spy on government officials from another sovereign (allegedly allied) nation. It's hard for me not to draw direct comparisons, because other than the surface level of "everything's fine, we have a common culture and we're all white" - I don't see them as being much different. Of course you're right, they're not the same, we don't see them the same. But China has arguably done less to the US than the US has done to the EU. Can you explain it to me?
    - shostack 4y ago
      Well for one, there's this thing called NATO. For another there isn't constant saber rattling between the EU and US.
bigcat12345678 4y ago
> 85% of US teenagers use tiktok. That's 85% of the future generation of US senators, Cabinet members, and Supreme Court justices, of police chiefs, civil rights activists, mayors, CEOs, etc. What's the basis of social elites are coming uniformly from the population? I think it's obvious that the social elites in all areas are predominantly from wealthy and affluent families. So the line of thinking of 85% teens corresponding to 85% or some number close elites, is baseless at best, and misleading at worst.
- api 4y ago
  So say it’s 50%. That’s not much better.
  - illiac786 4y ago
    Yes it is. And it's still baseless.
- jjeaff 4y ago
  Is there reason to believe that the elite use TikTok at disproportionally lower rates than the rest of the population? If anything, it's probably higher.
- BuyMyBitcoins 4y ago
  I feel like the 15% that do not use TikTok are more likely to be from lower class or impoverished families. Likely because they have limited access to smartphones or electronics of their own. I’m sure there are “elite” families who strictly forbid their children from using social media, but I suspect this population is very low. In my own anecdotal experience, the most affluent teens had the most access to drugs and things our parents forbade us from having.
yieldcrv 4y ago
Because having it all public and on moot’s server in Virginia is so much better I just can’t make this different enough. I see the difference, just not enough.
- HaZeust 4y ago
  4chan always served warrants, lol.
sharadov 4y ago
The data centers are running on Oracle cloud - which last I checked was a 100% US company, your entire argument is moot.
mikae1 4y ago
Or it will be the 15% that takes those positions while the 85% stay glued to TikTok…
- dburflzz 4y ago
  Because presidents, congresspeople, and justices are not known for wild behavior at all.
djantje 4y ago
I think the danger is way more in the addictive part. It is al interessting, and the users are a nice research group. But here in the Netherlands, 25% of the young people have the chance to become illiterate (yes become, reading/writing/communication skills dropping after primary and/or high school), part of it is the mobile phone, part of it social status and background.
woodruffw 4y ago
85% of US teenagers would be debased by the poor and foreign morals of James Joyce, if only we could get them to read Ulysses.
- shrimp_emoji 4y ago
  Something must be done. Oh, wait: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._One_Book_Called_Ulysses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._One_Book_Call...
- jimmytucson 4y ago
  It’s possible that the first generations who read Ulysses were worse off than the ones before—who thought Ulysses was harmful—but still better than the generations now, who don’t read much at all. If today’s next generation spent their time reading literature that was considered obscene 100 years ago, I think we’d all agree they’d be better off than spending 3 hours a day scrolling.
  - woodruffw 4y ago
    > but still better than the generations now, who don’t read much at all. By Plato's standards[1], we're doing better than ever! [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaedrus_(dialogue)#Discussion_of_rhetoric_and_writing_(257c%E2%80%93279c) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaedrus_(dialogue)#Discussion...
mrtksn 4y ago
I do agree about the risk and that cuts both ways, it's why EU and Russia and other countries are taking some precautions about the US companies and govt access to their citizens data. On the other hand, TikTok is a result of the stagnant US-made social media platforms. TikTok did innovate and gained its market share fair and square. As I said it multiple times before, I hope US takes the EU approach, that is, regulating the data access and not the Chinese approach of banning. US is facing this issue for the first time and it is a touchy topic. But please consider the implications, what happens if each political block chooses the banning/blocking approach? Do you want to live in a world with each country having its own separate internet? A lot of people are quick to rise the pitchforks and believe in the US superiority but ironically they demand government solution upon free market failure. I was genuinely scared about the future of the internet when the Trump admin tried to force acquisition by US tech giant or App Store ban over TikTok. What a relief when it failed.
- BuyMyBitcoins 4y ago
  Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t TikTok essentially just a more developed version of Vine? I remember Vines taking off in popularity before it being shut down for a reason I never fully understood.
  - mrtksn 4y ago
    And where is Vine now? Nothing is blank sheet new, everything is building on top of something and iterates and the truth is, when the US-made social media consolidated on politics and glamour photos TikTok came up with something fun and creative and apparently people love it.
galaktus 4y ago
> That's 85% of the future generation of US senators [...] That is false. Many young people who are material for such position, don't care about tiktok.
nonrandomstring 4y ago
> huge national security risk National security is the sum total of the individual earned securities of each citizen, no more or less. The distortion occurs when "national security" becomes the interests of a business elite, or a political party, or the job security of the security services themselves. We lose focus about what "security" really is. I agree with your point (as I understand it), but to my knowledge there isn't and never has been a division of national apparatus dedicated to defence of culture, national values, and the sanity of our children from insidious foreign propaganda. And as for direct counter-propaganda we are not allowed to direct psyops internally, at least not with a taxpayer's dollar. The "disappearance of the perimeter", as understood through the lens of the Huawei debacle is an example of how fast this has materialised and ambushed us in the social media age. But to be honest, I see the same problems with Facebook or US companies filtering and amplifying values. There isn't an easy answer. There are not enough human resources. There is very little common agreement. Nobody wants to open that can of worms. Doing so would mean going up against powerful businesses and I don't think the IC has the stomach for it or can adapt to the changing threats fast enough. So we just keep pretending "national security" is limited to industrial espionage by the Chinese or hacking by the Russians and so on. That's why I think individual Digital Self Defence via education is the only option. It needs baking into the curriculum for age 6 upwards.
jen20 4y ago
> 85% of US teenagers use tiktok. That's 85% of the future generation of US senators, Cabinet members, and Supreme Court justices, of police chiefs, civil rights activists, mayors, CEOs, etc Are we really sure this follows (even if the numbers are correct)?
Smithalicious 4y ago
But that knife cuts both ways; usage numbers for YouTube internationally are I presume quite similar, and that is content curated by a US company in US datacenters &c. You cannot have an open free global internet without having it be the case that people will use foreign services. If you do not think that's worth the tradeoff then state clearly what you want: for the internet to be cut up into disjointed silos along geopolitical lines.

by crmd 4y ago

lumost 4y ago

In what world does it make sense to allow a country who blocks access to their market unrestricted access to the US market? If china is a rival to the US, why do they have one of the most favorable trade deals?

sudosysgen 4y ago
Because it's not true that they have unrestricted access to the US market, see Huawei, ZTE, etc... And it's not true they have one of the most favourable trade deals, many tariffs are still in effect.
- Teever 4y ago
  But surely you see that there is a difference in how China regulates American companies operating in China and vice versa? Perhaps the US should adopt a tit for tat policy with regards to China in this matter?
  - bigcat12345678 4y ago
    What's the importance of means to an end? US rules the world through a liberal voting political propaganda; a rule-based capitalism market economy; a USD denominated financial structure. Sure, US blocked Huawei through rule of law; and you think China has no laws to block FB & Google? But behind the cloak of laws regulations, the intention of mutual exclusion is pure and same, nothing different.
gampleman 4y ago
One of these countries spent a century preaching to the world the benefits of free trade, the other ridding itself of the capitalist class. So the issue from the point of view of the rest of the world is that the US should practice what they preach even in the one case where that would mean allowing some mild competition to their massive and insanely profitable internet monopolies.
SkinTaco 4y ago
> If china is a rival to the US, why do they have one of the most favorable trade deals? I don't have an answer for you, but when you rephrase the point you're getting at it's easy to see there are plenty of valid reasons, because this is not true: > There are no reasons for the US to give a favorable trade deal to a country that is otherwise a rival
- lumost 4y ago
  You claim you don’t have an answer, but then state that by simple rephrasing the answer is obvious? Can you specify a specific reason? There are historic examples of trade deals made for this reason such as with the Soviet Union or communist china. However I cannot think of an example where a country has given unilaterally favorable trade terms to a rival except out of fealty/tribute.
- thrown_22 4y ago
  There is a difference between letting China export low value added products with many producers vs a literal spy in your bedroom. Is this now US policy too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTCqXlDjx18 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTCqXlDjx18
paulcole 4y ago
A world where we want $29 microwaves and iPhones produced 24/7 and delivered to our doorstep. People in America need China in order to keep living the lives we have.
- jjeaff 4y ago
  I'm not so sure that is really true anymore. I think that was the case in the past, when most manufacturing was very labor intensive. But now, so much is automated that things could be made anywhere for almost as cheap. Unfortunately, the US doesn't really have the infrastructure and capabilities to do so now.
  - naavis 4y ago
    So effectively they couldn't be made just anywhere, if they can't be made in the US?
  - paulcole 4y ago
    If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we’d all have a merry christmas.
  - jpgvm 4y ago
    A long time ago it was about labour costs but that isn't been true for over 2 decades. manufacturing anywhere outside of China can't compete with China anymore because of critical mass of supply chain. You should visit Shenzen and you will quickly understand why there is no place in the world like it and why there probably never will be. Hearing that people think you can 'just' replicate Shenzen somewhere else makes me giggle. Unfortunately for the US it also goes for batteries and other green energy tech that the US turned their back on in favour of oil these past decades. You can't just replicate Xinjiang polysilicon production, without which we can't have PV solar cells, also primarily made in China. CATL is probably the largest manufacturer of EV class batteries in the world. China makes more EVs than the rest of the world many times over, etc. Now they are also leading in nuclear, rolling out 200GW of next-gen reactors, they have their own fusion experiments. They have been leading in AI research for the last 10+ years. The days of China being cheaper are long long gone. You go to China because you can get access to talent, work ethic and optimised supply chain + logistics that can't be bought anywhere else on earth for any price. That dominance isn't going to be easily displaced because it's the product of decades of investment and R&D.
tchalla 4y ago
In the world where US controls the petrodollar system. That world.

meowtimemania 4y ago

should be edited to be: 85% of future generation will open tiktok at least once this month

airza 4y ago

The invisible comparison you seem to be making here is to Facebook or Twitter, companies which also do not seem to have my best interests in mind.

wslh 4y ago

In a scifi tone, it is interesting to extrapolate the personality of teenagers once they take roles in future governments.

throwaway4good 4y ago

TikTok's data centers are in the US.

Quillbert182 4y ago
That doesn’t mean China can’t access the data, and we have no guarantees that there aren’t copies of all that data in China.
- throwaway4good 4y ago
  Yes. What would be a good way to regulate this; still allowing open and fair competition while protecting the privacy of the broad population? So if the EU forces Facebook to store EU's citizens data in the EU. What would prevent Facebook copying that data to the US? Or have some American (potentially working for the NSA) remotely accessing EU data?
  - L0stRegulator 4y ago
    Under the US CLOUD Act, three letter agencies can compel Facebook to produce user data wherever in the world it is. When any other country has a law like that, they are obviously the bad guys.
    - throwaway29812 4y ago
      Via a transparent and public legal process. In China there is no: 1. Public legal process for data requests 2. Now that I think about it, there are no requests for data at all (they don't have to ask, it's just given) 3. Ability for any Chinese company to say no to gov requests Surely you don't view these circumstances as the same? Here is the page for the US CLOUD ACT: https://www.justice.gov/dag/cloudact https://www.justice.gov/dag/cloudact Where is the similar page detailing how the CCP balances civil rights with security?

dijit 4y ago

This might sound like a fallacious argument; but do you think the same about Europeans who consume almost exclusively US media and interact almost exclusively with US social media platforms? The US (famously) does not have Allies, only temporary allegiances. If you're discussing ties to government, Twitter and Facebook have members on their boards publicly who are sitting and/or former members of government including, at least in facebooks case: Robert Kimmitt (who was United States Ambassador to Germany from 1991 to 1993, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs from 1989 to 1991, General Counsel of the U.S. Department of the Treasury from 1985 to 1987, and National Security Council Executive Secretary and General Counsel from 1983 to 1985). Is it different rules for us in Europe? or are you suggesting that we should never have allowed this to happen? tl;dr: Why is US/China much different from EU/US or US/Japan (whom also makes a resounding impact on our technology and strongly affects our culture in the west).

dymk 4y ago
Yes, US/China relations are pretty distinct from US/EU relations.
- dijit 4y ago
  Why do you think that's the case? Aside from the trade-war that's going on, which is pretty arbirary; The US has routinely spied on Europe, allowed backdoored technology to make it's way into the continent including to spy on government officials from another sovereign (allegedly allied) nation. It's hard for me not to draw direct comparisons, because other than the surface level of "everything's fine, we have a common culture and we're all white" - I don't see them as being much different. Of course you're right, they're not the same, we don't see them the same. But China has arguably done less to the US than the US has done to the EU. Can you explain it to me?
  - shostack 4y ago
    Well for one, there's this thing called NATO. For another there isn't constant saber rattling between the EU and US.

bigcat12345678 4y ago

> 85% of US teenagers use tiktok. That's 85% of the future generation of US senators, Cabinet members, and Supreme Court justices, of police chiefs, civil rights activists, mayors, CEOs, etc. What's the basis of social elites are coming uniformly from the population? I think it's obvious that the social elites in all areas are predominantly from wealthy and affluent families. So the line of thinking of 85% teens corresponding to 85% or some number close elites, is baseless at best, and misleading at worst.

api 4y ago
So say it’s 50%. That’s not much better.
- illiac786 4y ago
  Yes it is. And it's still baseless.
jjeaff 4y ago
Is there reason to believe that the elite use TikTok at disproportionally lower rates than the rest of the population? If anything, it's probably higher.
BuyMyBitcoins 4y ago
I feel like the 15% that do not use TikTok are more likely to be from lower class or impoverished families. Likely because they have limited access to smartphones or electronics of their own. I’m sure there are “elite” families who strictly forbid their children from using social media, but I suspect this population is very low. In my own anecdotal experience, the most affluent teens had the most access to drugs and things our parents forbade us from having.

yieldcrv 4y ago

Because having it all public and on moot’s server in Virginia is so much better I just can’t make this different enough. I see the difference, just not enough.

HaZeust 4y ago
4chan always served warrants, lol.

sharadov 4y ago

The data centers are running on Oracle cloud - which last I checked was a 100% US company, your entire argument is moot.

mikae1 4y ago

Or it will be the 15% that takes those positions while the 85% stay glued to TikTok…

dburflzz 4y ago
Because presidents, congresspeople, and justices are not known for wild behavior at all.

djantje 4y ago

I think the danger is way more in the addictive part. It is al interessting, and the users are a nice research group. But here in the Netherlands, 25% of the young people have the chance to become illiterate (yes become, reading/writing/communication skills dropping after primary and/or high school), part of it is the mobile phone, part of it social status and background.

woodruffw 4y ago

85% of US teenagers would be debased by the poor and foreign morals of James Joyce, if only we could get them to read Ulysses.

shrimp_emoji 4y ago
Something must be done. Oh, wait: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._One_Book_Called_Ulysses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._One_Book_Call...
jimmytucson 4y ago
It’s possible that the first generations who read Ulysses were worse off than the ones before—who thought Ulysses was harmful—but still better than the generations now, who don’t read much at all. If today’s next generation spent their time reading literature that was considered obscene 100 years ago, I think we’d all agree they’d be better off than spending 3 hours a day scrolling.
- woodruffw 4y ago
  > but still better than the generations now, who don’t read much at all. By Plato's standards[1], we're doing better than ever! [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaedrus_(dialogue)#Discussion_of_rhetoric_and_writing_(257c%E2%80%93279c) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phaedrus_(dialogue)#Discussion...

mrtksn 4y ago

I do agree about the risk and that cuts both ways, it's why EU and Russia and other countries are taking some precautions about the US companies and govt access to their citizens data. On the other hand, TikTok is a result of the stagnant US-made social media platforms. TikTok did innovate and gained its market share fair and square. As I said it multiple times before, I hope US takes the EU approach, that is, regulating the data access and not the Chinese approach of banning. US is facing this issue for the first time and it is a touchy topic. But please consider the implications, what happens if each political block chooses the banning/blocking approach? Do you want to live in a world with each country having its own separate internet? A lot of people are quick to rise the pitchforks and believe in the US superiority but ironically they demand government solution upon free market failure. I was genuinely scared about the future of the internet when the Trump admin tried to force acquisition by US tech giant or App Store ban over TikTok. What a relief when it failed.

BuyMyBitcoins 4y ago
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t TikTok essentially just a more developed version of Vine? I remember Vines taking off in popularity before it being shut down for a reason I never fully understood.
- mrtksn 4y ago
  And where is Vine now? Nothing is blank sheet new, everything is building on top of something and iterates and the truth is, when the US-made social media consolidated on politics and glamour photos TikTok came up with something fun and creative and apparently people love it.

galaktus 4y ago

> That's 85% of the future generation of US senators [...] That is false. Many young people who are material for such position, don't care about tiktok.

nonrandomstring 4y ago

> huge national security risk National security is the sum total of the individual earned securities of each citizen, no more or less. The distortion occurs when "national security" becomes the interests of a business elite, or a political party, or the job security of the security services themselves. We lose focus about what "security" really is. I agree with your point (as I understand it), but to my knowledge there isn't and never has been a division of national apparatus dedicated to defence of culture, national values, and the sanity of our children from insidious foreign propaganda. And as for direct counter-propaganda we are not allowed to direct psyops internally, at least not with a taxpayer's dollar. The "disappearance of the perimeter", as understood through the lens of the Huawei debacle is an example of how fast this has materialised and ambushed us in the social media age. But to be honest, I see the same problems with Facebook or US companies filtering and amplifying values. There isn't an easy answer. There are not enough human resources. There is very little common agreement. Nobody wants to open that can of worms. Doing so would mean going up against powerful businesses and I don't think the IC has the stomach for it or can adapt to the changing threats fast enough. So we just keep pretending "national security" is limited to industrial espionage by the Chinese or hacking by the Russians and so on. That's why I think individual Digital Self Defence via education is the only option. It needs baking into the curriculum for age 6 upwards.

jen20 4y ago

Smithalicious 4y ago

But that knife cuts both ways; usage numbers for YouTube internationally are I presume quite similar, and that is content curated by a US company in US datacenters &c. You cannot have an open free global internet without having it be the case that people will use foreign services. If you do not think that's worth the tradeoff then state clearly what you want: for the internet to be cut up into disjointed silos along geopolitical lines.