5 ms·
I understand why they banned it. However, I also know western apps are closed to work in the Chinese market. So I get privacy and security are reasons to ban th
by nixcraft 4y ago
I understand why they banned it. However, I also know western apps are closed to work in the Chinese market. So I get privacy and security are reasons to ban the TikTok app at the school or government level. However, I would like to see the same tight control for every app that invades privacy regardless if it was made in the EU, USA, China, etc. Is that too much to ask? Or is lobbying so intense from Google, Amazon, Meta, Apple (who is now getting into the Ads business too), and co that it is next to impossible to have tight privacy control with these apps?
- edgyquant 4y agoAt the moment at least it’s hard to make a similar argument for any of those companies posing a US national security threat.
- happymellon 4y agoHow you can't put Meta in that same group astounds me considering that they have a significant history of this.
- dicomdan 4y ago[flagged]
- braingenious 4y agoGlad that there are absolutely no similar things happening in US or European politics! It’s great to live past the light of Valinor where no bad things happen.
- sterlind 4y agoneo-nazi is a bit over the top. there are actual neo-nazis.. the American Nazi Party, the Azov battalion (formerly), skinheads and things. sure, China's trying to force Han ethnic principles on their populace. arguably nationalist, though they're so involved in trade and stuff like the Belt and Road program that it's different. an authoritarian regime, arguably a dictatorship (Xi has the final say but he's not a strong-man like Putin, CCP is more an oligocracy.) but... no, China does not want to resurrect Hitler and lead the Aryan race into the fourth Reich. neo-nazi has an actual meaning, which is important because there are actual neo-nazis out there.
- qqtt 4y agoIt's more that China represents a national security threat and it's OK to special case logic for hostile foreign entities. Notably China isn't the only entity called out in this bill, also North Korea, Russia, & Iran. The privacy conversation IMO is a separate conversation entirely. If consumers want privacy, they have options (like, don't use apps which track you). Banning the collection of data on government employees to be consumed by hostile foreign entities is more about the USA Federal government not being OK with hostile foreign government's abilities to track its employees. And not all foreign governments - only the ones named in the bill.
- rapind 4y agoCouple of linkedin data breaches should definitely put them on the nope list for government devices.
- judge2020 4y agoIt's Microsoft, so never going to happen.
- TaylorAlexander 4y agoPersonally I don't want US companies to have power over me any more than I want Chinese companies to have it. Also China can and will just make shell companies in the USA with apps that track people. Tiktok is a breakout success but it seems plausible that they have the resources to make other popular apps. Going forward they will launch them through US firms to evade bans like this. The only long term solution is to implement real privacy, and face the fact that US companies built their businesses on surveillance and must change.
- babypuncher 4y agoWe've already seen how US companies like Facebook will let any foreign entities with money use this data however they see fit. It makes no sense to single out TikTok or China. Pass stiff data hygiene regulations that make this sort of abuse impossible to begin with, rather than playing whack-a-mole with individual actors.