4 ms·

The reply you are replying to isn't making an argument regarding government paternalism, but regarding economic protectionism. You aren't addressing that. An an

The reply you are replying to isn't making an argument regarding government paternalism, but regarding economic protectionism. You aren't addressing that. An analogy: embargos against countries that do not adhere to international IP treaties.

KennyBlanken 4y ago
It's not really a matter of "international IP treaties", Tiktok's app is spyware that collects extensive data about users and includes remote command and control capabilities that have no excuse or reason for existing in a social media app. https://penetrum.com/tiktok/Penetrum_TikTok_Security_Analysis_whitepaper.pdf https://penetrum.com/tiktok/Penetrum_TikTok_Security_Analysi...
- jhanschoo 4y ago
  Yes, the reason the government gives isn't about economic protectionism either, but that's the argument the person was making.
- babypuncher 4y ago
  American social media apps do the same yet for some reason we are OK with them doing it.
- dinkumthinkum 4y ago
  Honestly, I think the content on TikTok is doing more harm than anything else.
roenxi 4y ago
It isn't clear that the argument is either which way. If we interpret it economically, the argument is a variant of "we should cut off our own nose to spite our face". Why should the American consumer be hampered because the Chinese consumer is hampered? That isn't clever. But there is a pretty good military argument. Giving the Chinese government an easy way in to most mobile devices seems like a rookie mistake. Ideally, the US should legislate that all code is covered by the GPLv2 or v3 so we can monitor what is going on and be positioned to exercise freedom from Chinese spying. That's be the best of most worlds. The real issue here is, as usual, that we can't see the source code so we don't know what it does.
- mantas 4y ago
  Economically it’s more like if Chinese companies are helped by the government, why can’t West do the same? Same as anti-dumping import taxes.
  - roenxi 4y ago
    The question isn't one of "can" and "can't". The west is empowered to make its own people worse off. The politicians do so all the time. The issue is we've got a situation with a high quality Chinese option and lower quality western one. Obviously Westerners will be worse off if the high quality option is banned. They all wanted to use that one (otherwise it wouldn't be necessary to ban it). It is obviously making them pick an option they'd rather not. There is no economic reason to voluntarily make people worse off. It is pure downside. > Same as anti-dumping import taxes. They're also on shaky footing and probably make people worse off for little gain. Wikipedia humorously notes that in the EU 98% of the time anti dumping laws are being used to target things other than dumping. Academics have to be pretty wild-eyed to argue that people need to be protected from large amounts of cheap stuff. I personally can't even imagine their horror. If someone sells you stuff for cheap, buy it for cheap. The market will work it out.
    - mantas 4y ago
      In anti-dumping, it’s protecting not the people. It’s protecting local market. Goods at dumped prices will disrupt local markets and bankrupt local competitors. Then dumpers can raise prices way beyond initial prices to win jackpot. That when „the people“ loose. Local know-how is destroyed, industry ruined… and you end up paying a ton for imported goods. Personally I don’t think TikTok is „better“. It’s more addictive and has a ton of marketing moneys pushing it forward. Should we not ban cocaine because the masses think it’s a great entertainment?

KennyBlanken 4y ago

It's not really a matter of "international IP treaties", Tiktok's app is spyware that collects extensive data about users and includes remote command and control capabilities that have no excuse or reason for existing in a social media app. https://penetrum.com/tiktok/Penetrum_TikTok_Security_Analysis_whitepaper.pdf https://penetrum.com/tiktok/Penetrum_TikTok_Security_Analysi...

jhanschoo 4y ago
Yes, the reason the government gives isn't about economic protectionism either, but that's the argument the person was making.
babypuncher 4y ago
American social media apps do the same yet for some reason we are OK with them doing it.
dinkumthinkum 4y ago
Honestly, I think the content on TikTok is doing more harm than anything else.

roenxi 4y ago

It isn't clear that the argument is either which way. If we interpret it economically, the argument is a variant of "we should cut off our own nose to spite our face". Why should the American consumer be hampered because the Chinese consumer is hampered? That isn't clever. But there is a pretty good military argument. Giving the Chinese government an easy way in to most mobile devices seems like a rookie mistake. Ideally, the US should legislate that all code is covered by the GPLv2 or v3 so we can monitor what is going on and be positioned to exercise freedom from Chinese spying. That's be the best of most worlds. The real issue here is, as usual, that we can't see the source code so we don't know what it does.

mantas 4y ago
Economically it’s more like if Chinese companies are helped by the government, why can’t West do the same? Same as anti-dumping import taxes.
- roenxi 4y ago
  The question isn't one of "can" and "can't". The west is empowered to make its own people worse off. The politicians do so all the time. The issue is we've got a situation with a high quality Chinese option and lower quality western one. Obviously Westerners will be worse off if the high quality option is banned. They all wanted to use that one (otherwise it wouldn't be necessary to ban it). It is obviously making them pick an option they'd rather not. There is no economic reason to voluntarily make people worse off. It is pure downside. > Same as anti-dumping import taxes. They're also on shaky footing and probably make people worse off for little gain. Wikipedia humorously notes that in the EU 98% of the time anti dumping laws are being used to target things other than dumping. Academics have to be pretty wild-eyed to argue that people need to be protected from large amounts of cheap stuff. I personally can't even imagine their horror. If someone sells you stuff for cheap, buy it for cheap. The market will work it out.
  - mantas 4y ago
    In anti-dumping, it’s protecting not the people. It’s protecting local market. Goods at dumped prices will disrupt local markets and bankrupt local competitors. Then dumpers can raise prices way beyond initial prices to win jackpot. That when „the people“ loose. Local know-how is destroyed, industry ruined… and you end up paying a ton for imported goods. Personally I don’t think TikTok is „better“. It’s more addictive and has a ton of marketing moneys pushing it forward. Should we not ban cocaine because the masses think it’s a great entertainment?