7 ms·

I still haven't heard any convincing reasoning for banning TikTok besides Western companies being salty that a Chinese product is beating them in the free marke

I still haven't heard any convincing reasoning for banning TikTok besides Western companies being salty that a Chinese product is beating them in the free market.

nindalf 4y ago
Yes, of course we should ban TikTok by Noahpinion (https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/yes-of-course-we-should-ban-tiktok https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/yes-of-course-we-should-ba...) should help you understand the arguments in favour.
- Zigurd 4y ago
  I read that. tl;dr: CCP bad. It didn't make a lot of sense. It was a weak argument. Until I got to this part: In other words, even if the TikTok issue seems largely symbolic right now, the app’s dominance of American media gives China’s government a considerable amount of option value in the event of a crisis. TikTok could become really important, really fast. In other words, it could be bad at some future time. But the US is overwhelmingly supportive of Ukraine (and there is a lot of pro-Ukraine content on TikTok) and Taiwan. Americans broadly understand these are democracies under threat and deserve support. TikTok is not in a position to change those perceptions.
- kaczordon 4y ago
  Hmm idk about this. You should always be suspicious when something has overwhelming bipartisan support and the US Security State also wants to ban it. See this video: https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1637483021120024579 https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1637483021120024579 Because they can’t control it like they can control Google, Microsoft etc. inserting whatever back doors they want. Video outlines it well.
- dannyisaphantom 4y ago
  > TikTok could become really important, really fast. We shouldn’t let things get to that point. Twitter was and is still very, very popularly used to get immediate news in the event of domestic and international emergencies and it still is at this point considering it is used as a platform which agencies can use to convey information quickly and have it retweeted. Anyone who has been on Twitter recognizes this. You can still find first-person POV from users in some really interesting situations that would otherwise not be shown on mass-media networks due to regulatory controls on what can and can't be shown. Does that validate the use-case in Twitter being banned? Let's say the new owner doesn't want to show reporting from what is happening in Eastern Europe - does that further solidify an argument that it should be banned because it has been 'weaponized'? The author at no point references Twitter in their article and just continues on a narrow lens on the subject matter. What is the value in banning an app in a shroud of hypotheticals?
- usednet 4y ago
  Thanks for sharing. I read through the sources in the article. > Toward the end of the 45–minute experiment, analysts’ feeds were almost exclusively populated with both accurate and false content related to the war in Ukraine A DoD funded company says that new accounts on TikTok were exposed to correct and incorrect information the Ukraine war. This is going to be true on any social media app in the entire world. > For years, lawmakers and commentators have feared that the Chinese government could use TikTok — which is owned by a Chinese parent company, ByteDance — to secretly distribute content sympathetic to the Chinese Communist Party in order to shift public opinion in the United States. Former employees of a separate app that shut down 3 years ago claim they were told to pin videos of pandas and tourism in China to the front page. > TikTok can collect, which includes faceprints, voiceprints, browsing history, text messages, and pretty much anything you do on your phone Again, not unique. Do I like TikTok? No. But I don't think hypotheticals are enough reason to ban it. I think this is a very similar scenario to the 2016 Russian misinformation hysteria that was ultimately mostly unfounded.
sp527 4y ago
A perfectly reasonable argument would be that China doesn't allow American companies to freely compete in their country and we should therefore maintain duly reciprocal treatment.
- hgsgm 4y ago
  That's a different issue from the information security aspect. Chinese spying on US isn't mitigated by US getting a chance to spy on Chinese. The concern is that the market deals in materials too dangerous to be allowed to be run by foreign adversaries.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- 4lb0 4y ago
  Yes, that's a good argument for Americans. For non-Chinese, non-Americans, TikTok is not different from any other social media app.
  - falcolas 4y ago
    As an American, I believe you've hit the nail on the head. Facebook is as bad as TikTok if you live in Taiwan, for example. Both companies will (if they haven't already) give your data to their respective governments in a heartbeat.
- Zigurd 4y ago
  That's true across a broad set of economically more significant domains than social media. But there is no moral panic over (shoddy) Chinese trains on the Orange Line.
  - sp527 4y ago
    Yes, absolutely. We should be getting those trains manufactured elsewhere. And, in fact, geopolitical tension is prompting American companies to shift their manufacturing base out of China.
quasarj 4y ago
Because there isn't one.
classified 4y ago
Free market is only propagandized as long as it benefits the incumbents. Once they get outmatched, they'll go all communist on you.
- hgsgm 4y ago
  Category error. China has state capitalism, and "communist" is name only, and not relevant to the topic.
  - classified 4y ago
    Communism is still the opposite of free market.
idiotsecant 4y ago
I think you're being just a bit disingenuous, but I somewhat agree with the message, if not the spirit, of what you're saying. What we should be banning is behavior, not authorship. Does the application retrieve user data? What data? Is that retrieval bad and user hostile? Ban that behavior. Does the application do something else bad? Ban that behavior. Banning something simply because it's controlled by a government we don't like is a bad precedent. We should do the work to describe what specifically the application is doing that we don't like and address that, because it would also have the effect of applying consumer-friendly laws to all the others apps doing that as well with the goal of making ad revenue and not just collecting information for a hostile government.
- falcolas 4y ago
  I believe the issue is that were we to ban based solely on behavior and not country of origin, we'd have to ban every single social network in existence right now. And probably many, if not most traditional media outlets too. Maybe a few hundred other ad and personal information sales supported applications. There are very few good actors on the internet today, when you evaluate them based on the behaviors you mention.
  - idiotsecant 4y ago
    Yes, that's precisely my point. If we care about preventing bad behaviors lets prevent bad behaviors . We would all benefit. The answer to bad behavior being pervasive is not to throw up your hands and just pick special cases to ban, it's to fix the behavior.
PreachSoup 4y ago
1. CCP has control and data access to China companies. Ppl need to beware that's how CCP works. They insert party members into the companies and can take control of the companies at will. If you don't believe me, go look it up. Also ask Jack Ma how is his holiday 2. Many products are banned in china (google, twitter, facebook, whatsapp, github... etc). And CCP bans at will. Maybe a bit of retaliation is justified?
- RobotToaster 4y ago
  Oh no, the evil CPC will know what shitty dances American teenagers are doing. They aren't banned "at will" they were banned for violating Chinese law by refusing to remove illegal content. You can disagree with those laws, but calling it "at will" is disingenuous.
  - PreachSoup 4y ago
    U mean the law written by CCP and used by CCP? In China where rule of law is a joke? That's right Jack Ma lost the company because he broke the law, not because he dared to step out of the line with Ants Financial. If you are a CCP shill, I don't care what you say; If you are not, do more research
km3r 4y ago
It is not a free market. TikTok has access to a billion extra users that the rest of the world does not have access to. That enables easier testing of features, lower margins, and more content. A country should only allow foreign businesses in from countries that would allow that same business in from our country. Pretending the CCP subsidized enterprise is a free market is just wrong.

I still haven't heard any convincing reasoning for banning TikTok besides Western companies being salty that a Chinese product is beating them in the free market.

nindalf 4y ago

Yes, of course we should ban TikTok by Noahpinion (https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/yes-of-course-we-should-ban-tiktok https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/yes-of-course-we-should-ba...) should help you understand the arguments in favour.

Zigurd 4y ago
I read that. tl;dr: CCP bad. It didn't make a lot of sense. It was a weak argument. Until I got to this part: In other words, even if the TikTok issue seems largely symbolic right now, the app’s dominance of American media gives China’s government a considerable amount of option value in the event of a crisis. TikTok could become really important, really fast. In other words, it could be bad at some future time. But the US is overwhelmingly supportive of Ukraine (and there is a lot of pro-Ukraine content on TikTok) and Taiwan. Americans broadly understand these are democracies under threat and deserve support. TikTok is not in a position to change those perceptions.
kaczordon 4y ago
Hmm idk about this. You should always be suspicious when something has overwhelming bipartisan support and the US Security State also wants to ban it. See this video: https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1637483021120024579 https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1637483021120024579 Because they can’t control it like they can control Google, Microsoft etc. inserting whatever back doors they want. Video outlines it well.
dannyisaphantom 4y ago
> TikTok could become really important, really fast. We shouldn’t let things get to that point. Twitter was and is still very, very popularly used to get immediate news in the event of domestic and international emergencies and it still is at this point considering it is used as a platform which agencies can use to convey information quickly and have it retweeted. Anyone who has been on Twitter recognizes this. You can still find first-person POV from users in some really interesting situations that would otherwise not be shown on mass-media networks due to regulatory controls on what can and can't be shown. Does that validate the use-case in Twitter being banned? Let's say the new owner doesn't want to show reporting from what is happening in Eastern Europe - does that further solidify an argument that it should be banned because it has been 'weaponized'? The author at no point references Twitter in their article and just continues on a narrow lens on the subject matter. What is the value in banning an app in a shroud of hypotheticals?
usednet 4y ago
Thanks for sharing. I read through the sources in the article. > Toward the end of the 45–minute experiment, analysts’ feeds were almost exclusively populated with both accurate and false content related to the war in Ukraine A DoD funded company says that new accounts on TikTok were exposed to correct and incorrect information the Ukraine war. This is going to be true on any social media app in the entire world. > For years, lawmakers and commentators have feared that the Chinese government could use TikTok — which is owned by a Chinese parent company, ByteDance — to secretly distribute content sympathetic to the Chinese Communist Party in order to shift public opinion in the United States. Former employees of a separate app that shut down 3 years ago claim they were told to pin videos of pandas and tourism in China to the front page. > TikTok can collect, which includes faceprints, voiceprints, browsing history, text messages, and pretty much anything you do on your phone Again, not unique. Do I like TikTok? No. But I don't think hypotheticals are enough reason to ban it. I think this is a very similar scenario to the 2016 Russian misinformation hysteria that was ultimately mostly unfounded.

sp527 4y ago

A perfectly reasonable argument would be that China doesn't allow American companies to freely compete in their country and we should therefore maintain duly reciprocal treatment.

hgsgm 4y ago
That's a different issue from the information security aspect. Chinese spying on US isn't mitigated by US getting a chance to spy on Chinese. The concern is that the market deals in materials too dangerous to be allowed to be run by foreign adversaries.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
4lb0 4y ago
Yes, that's a good argument for Americans. For non-Chinese, non-Americans, TikTok is not different from any other social media app.
- falcolas 4y ago
  As an American, I believe you've hit the nail on the head. Facebook is as bad as TikTok if you live in Taiwan, for example. Both companies will (if they haven't already) give your data to their respective governments in a heartbeat.
Zigurd 4y ago
That's true across a broad set of economically more significant domains than social media. But there is no moral panic over (shoddy) Chinese trains on the Orange Line.
- sp527 4y ago
  Yes, absolutely. We should be getting those trains manufactured elsewhere. And, in fact, geopolitical tension is prompting American companies to shift their manufacturing base out of China.

quasarj 4y ago

Because there isn't one.

classified 4y ago

Free market is only propagandized as long as it benefits the incumbents. Once they get outmatched, they'll go all communist on you.

hgsgm 4y ago
Category error. China has state capitalism, and "communist" is name only, and not relevant to the topic.
- classified 4y ago
  Communism is still the opposite of free market.

idiotsecant 4y ago

I think you're being just a bit disingenuous, but I somewhat agree with the message, if not the spirit, of what you're saying. What we should be banning is behavior, not authorship. Does the application retrieve user data? What data? Is that retrieval bad and user hostile? Ban that behavior. Does the application do something else bad? Ban that behavior. Banning something simply because it's controlled by a government we don't like is a bad precedent. We should do the work to describe what specifically the application is doing that we don't like and address that, because it would also have the effect of applying consumer-friendly laws to all the others apps doing that as well with the goal of making ad revenue and not just collecting information for a hostile government.

falcolas 4y ago
I believe the issue is that were we to ban based solely on behavior and not country of origin, we'd have to ban every single social network in existence right now. And probably many, if not most traditional media outlets too. Maybe a few hundred other ad and personal information sales supported applications. There are very few good actors on the internet today, when you evaluate them based on the behaviors you mention.
- idiotsecant 4y ago
  Yes, that's precisely my point. If we care about preventing bad behaviors lets prevent bad behaviors . We would all benefit. The answer to bad behavior being pervasive is not to throw up your hands and just pick special cases to ban, it's to fix the behavior.

PreachSoup 4y ago

1. CCP has control and data access to China companies. Ppl need to beware that's how CCP works. They insert party members into the companies and can take control of the companies at will. If you don't believe me, go look it up. Also ask Jack Ma how is his holiday 2. Many products are banned in china (google, twitter, facebook, whatsapp, github... etc). And CCP bans at will. Maybe a bit of retaliation is justified?

RobotToaster 4y ago
Oh no, the evil CPC will know what shitty dances American teenagers are doing. They aren't banned "at will" they were banned for violating Chinese law by refusing to remove illegal content. You can disagree with those laws, but calling it "at will" is disingenuous.
- PreachSoup 4y ago
  U mean the law written by CCP and used by CCP? In China where rule of law is a joke? That's right Jack Ma lost the company because he broke the law, not because he dared to step out of the line with Ants Financial. If you are a CCP shill, I don't care what you say; If you are not, do more research

km3r 4y ago

It is not a free market. TikTok has access to a billion extra users that the rest of the world does not have access to. That enables easier testing of features, lower margins, and more content. A country should only allow foreign businesses in from countries that would allow that same business in from our country. Pretending the CCP subsidized enterprise is a free market is just wrong.