31 ms·
TikTok is now banned in Montana
- ortusdux 3y agoLink to SB0419 text - https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/billpdf/SB0419.pdf https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/billpdf/SB0419.pdf
- bombcar 3y agoGoes live Jan 1, 2024! YouTube is gonna take this in the Shorts ;)
- mcast 3y agoHow would this even be technically enforced? It seems TikTok would have no reason to pay for any fines from the state.
- pizzaknife 3y agocloudfront could do it. imagine the partnership opportunities
- stale2002 3y agoThe bill is targeting app store providers. So, the way that it is enforced, is if the major app stores, do not remove TikTok, then they get fined a bunch of money. > It seems TikTok would have no reason to pay for any fines from the state. Well, ignoring the fact that this applies to app stores, companies can't just ignore court orders. If they do, then their bank accounts could be frozen. US banks aren't going to ignore US court orders. Bank of America, or whoever, is going to give that money to the government, when it is ordered to do so. I guess if Apple, and Google, want to shut down their US operations, then that would allow them to avoid the fines. But, I expect they won't do that, and will simply remove those apps from their app store, for Montana residents.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- aio2 3y agofuck
- aio2 3y ago[flagged]
- throwaway5959 3y agoHow is this constitutional?
- Spivak 3y agoWait for the lawsuit from the ACLU + collation to drop. It likely isn't. It's technically a secret that they're going to sue but everyone already knows at this point so it's fine.
- jfengel 3y ago"Constitutional" is what five members of the Supreme Court say it is. I'm sure they can come up with reasoning either way. I suspect most neutral observers would say it's unconstitutional. But what they think does not matter.
- cwillu 3y agoNeed to add “here's what you need to know” to the automatic clickbait remover.
- Razengan 3y agoI find "Here's...." such an infuriating thing. Like, what, did someone do "research" and see that it gets more clicks?
- Kye 3y agoIt's hard to find them these days, but some of the blogging about blogging/internet marketing crowd used to post data on headlines and what got clicks based on different sources like Facebook and Twitter. Examples from one of the larger still active blogs here: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=titles+site%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fmoz.com%2Fblog&t=h_&ia=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=titles+site%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fmoz.co... There were also lists of headline swipe files that provided lots of templates.
- dang 3y agoLooks doable. I've added it to my list. Thanks! (Manually removed in the meantime)
- proactivesvcs 3y agoI hadn't even noticed it was a feature. The fact that I am not immediately turned off by the headlines here makes my ignorance a surprise!
- dang 3y agoIt's one of those things that doesn't get noticed when it works well, which we hope is most of the time. That has an amusing side effect: the cases that people notice are the ones that they don't like—those stand out like sore thumbs—and this creates the feeling that the title edits are always annoying and wrong. Which is true, if you don't count any of the good cases! Thus most of the comments about HN's title editing system (software + mods) are about how awful and obviously terrible it is, and comments like yours here are rarities. In the end this is all priced in, so to speak, to HN's system. The main thing is that the front page be mostly free of misleading and/or linkbait titles and gimmicks. pg used to describe it like this: we want the front page of HN to look bookish. That is, it should look interesting to people who like to read, and look boring to people who don't.
- PraetorianGourd 3y agoIt is not now banned, it is scheduled to be banned in January 2024.
- millzlane 3y agoGives plenty of kids time to figure out how to use VPNs and spawns a whole state of hackers.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Razengan 3y agoOh fうck. Begun the censorship wars have. Will more countries ban Facebook/Twitter/Reddit etc?
- cute_boi 3y agoWhat happened to freedom of speech. I thought many politician, especially republicans cry for free speech.
- unfunco 3y agoWhat does free speech have to do with this?
- welshwelsh 3y agoTik tok videos are speech, therefore banning tiktok is a violation of free speech
- nhinck2 3y agoA bit of silly analogy but if a megaphone recorded everything about the person speaking into it and forwarded it to a semi-adversarial state, would banning that megaphone be a violation of freespeech?
- radu_floricica 3y agoHaven't read the bill, but I'll go on a limb and say it's not written to apply to all apps owned by semi-adversarial states.
- nhinck2 3y agoOf course, it's a hypothetical to tease out why people think it's a violation of free speech. A law this specific wouldn't even be valid I'm my country.
- Tangurena2 3y agoIt is substantially the same as the one passed in my state. The first sentence of senate bill 419: > AN ACT BANNING TIKTOK IN MONTANA; PROHIBITING A MOBILE APPLICATION STORE FROM OFFERING THE TIKTOK APPLICATION TO MONTANA USERS https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/billpdf/SB0419.pdf https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/billpdf/SB0419.pdf
- insomagent 3y agoWhat do I need to know, as somebody who doesn't live in the USA?
- Minor49er 3y agoEverything that you need to know is conveniently provided within the article
- Andaith 3y ago"and demands mobile app stores make the app unavailable for Montana residents." Oh so now they've made an enemy of Google & Apples legal teams? Because those two aren't going to want to set a precedent for all sorts of bans across random jurisdictions.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- citizenkeen 3y agoThey already do? Plenty of apps are banned in various countries, if I recall correctly.
- didntknowya 3y agoIt's usually the publishers who choose what countries they appear in rather than the store itself.
- flangola7 3y agoThere's many country level bans by the store and have been for years.
- MichaelZuo 3y agoBut no sub-national level bans, that are enforced, at least from what I've heard.
- flangola7 3y agoAt a technological level there is no difference. If there's a reliable mechanism for geo-walling content they can carve up the map however they wish. Nothing says it can only follow national borders.
- nickthegreek 3y agoThese are states… should there be city level bans too? Where does it end. Now they need 50 different app stores just for the US customers? Does DC get its own? How should we handle US territories… I think Apple and a Google have plenty reason to fight this.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- unethical_ban 3y agoThis sets a bad precedent and is also futile.
- draw_down 3y ago[dead]
- quantum_state 3y agoBlatant violation of constitutional rights… what a shame!
- nahnahg 3y ago[dead]
- skrowl 3y ago[dead]
- smoldesu 3y agoNah, this is entirely our mistake. Our devices took away our ability to choose what we install, and now certain individuals get strongarmed like this and we lose our say. The shame is that modern society went 10 whole years thinking this was a smart move because Twitter wasn't shit and the news wasn't scary enough yet.
- caf 3y agoBring on the Great Firewall of Montana!
- nahnahg 3y ago[dead]
- black_13 3y ago[dead]
- usernew 3y agoWhile a dupe, there are thousands of users reading this site sporadically - I've been on here over a decade and have never seen either previous discussion. The site's fresh out of 1990 design is hostile towards navigation of anything beyond a few pages of comments. If people discussed this enough in the other 2 threads, they can... gasp.. skip the discussion here. so let me kick it off then. What exactly does this mean? To illustrate my point, let's change the scenario. There's a small town north of Chicago called Skokie. 100k people. Lets say they pass a "law" to ban some app from Google's play store. People in Montana should perhaps take their phone, ask it what a computer is, listen to Siri's answer, then call 411 and ask them how to open a pdf. Then they should shovel some cow dung - as is daily life - and finally then they can pass some laws about cow dung. And now this, from the Australia lawmakers. Australia, the Montana of the planet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VB3uQHa14g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VB3uQHa14g
- tiedieconderoga 3y ago>The law specifies that no penalties apply to users of TikTok. But app store operators and TikTok itself could face fines of $10,000 per violation per day, with an individual violation defined as “each time that a user accesses TikTok, is offered the ability to access TikTok, or is offered the ability to download TikTok.” Sounds like a money-printing machine.
- proxiful-wash 3y ago[flagged]
- krapp 3y agoNo. Although I'm a Texan, it'll probably happen anyway if it hasn't already and my vote doesn't matter. I don't want the government deciding what software I'm allowed to use and what forms of speech and entertainment I'm allowed to expose myself to. And I notice none of these conservatives are talking about banning Twitter anymore - which is far more psychologically manipulative than TikTok - now that one of their own has taken it over to push as much right-wing propaganda on it as possible, just to hassle the "woke hivemind." I'm fine with app stores making the decision on their own but I prefer to not throw the entire framework of free speech out the window just because stoking fear of the "red menace" still works in the US.
- unethical_ban 3y agoWhy not advocate for general phone privacy laws? Why can't apps that require geo data use location then discard it? Why can't users decide? Because these laws don't care about privacy if American companies and government reap the data. I think TikTok is malware, and I think the reasons the US wants to ban it are self serving. Not how the RESTRICT act bans VPNs, for goodness sake. I am highly skeptical of government making a coherent privacy bill that isn't a backdoor to more domestic surveillance.
- nickthegreek 3y agoThen ban the psychological manipulation. Not one company. And good luck defining that term legally without running afoul of the constitution.
- cma 3y agoIsn't this a bill of attainder?
- Tangurena2 3y agoYes. It lists one single product. It tries to wrap some semblance of legality by referring to 15 CFR 7.4 (a list of foreign "adversaries"). If they really cared about such legality, they'd have banned every app from every country in that list (most of which would be illegal in the US anyway). https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-A/part-7/subpart-A/section-7.4 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-A/part-7/subp...
- COGlory 3y agoFrustratingly, Gianforte has so far lived up to all my expectations for him. I love Montana, it's a great and beautiful place to live, but hilariously the California liberal migration invoked a huge immune response turning an otherwise purple state deep red and sending them off the deep end. Sucks to see this happen.
- zokula 3y ago[dead]
- MikusR 3y agoAlso Telegram
- exabrial 3y agogood, please ban facebook next.
- client4 3y agoIt's the beginning of States waking up and helping protect citizens privacy when it comes to technology. Sure this is a one-off directed at TikTok, but Montanan's have a constitutional right to privacy that's being violated daily by technology companies. Another great bill to check out is by State Senator Daniel Zolnikov regarding consumer data privacy. I'm optimistic for a future where I have a legally enforceable right to privacy. Specifically one where I can use modern technology without the depraved acceptance I'm giving up my digital privacy. http://laws.leg.mt.gov/legprd/law0210W$BSIV.ActionQuery?P_BILL_DFT_NO5=LC1086&Z_ACTION=Find&P_Sess=20231 http://laws.leg.mt.gov/legprd/law0210W$BSIV.ActionQuery?P_BI...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- stevefan1999 3y agoAnd people would just use VPN to dodge this anyway just like how people from Louisiana dodged PornHub ban.
- mock-possum 3y agoI don’t like TikTok But I don’t like this
- chris-orgmenta 3y ago"Is there a good reason to ban TikTok?... the answer is still “nobody knows.” I believe the second sentence answers the first, but not in the way the author intended. I'm not fundamentally insisting that we legally declare all data compromised until proven otherwise, but there is reasonable risk here that we cannot assuage. As for whether SB 419 can be upheld: Eh. ~50 states, one of which is being used as a test here. Fine, that's one of the great benefits of the state+fed system. This is probing and forcing people to have the conversation, and that alone feels like this is worth it. Of course I 'sacrifice' Montana residents with this statement, which I arguably have no right to do.
- klyrs 3y ago> Of course I 'sacrifice' Montana residents with this statement, which I arguably have no right to do. Unless you're a legislator in Montana, you don't bear an iota of responsibility here.
- chris-orgmenta 3y ago>you don't bear an iota of responsibility here. Hmm, I think I do - A) as any bystander to any injustice, B) If I have more knowledge on the industry than the average person.
- Tangurena2 3y agoEvery Republican controlled state passed some sort of TikTok ban this year. TikTok has joined "transgender" and "abortion" as the current moral panics driving right wing discourse & legislation.
- hunglee2 3y agoControlling what people think is key to stable society. Great to see the US learn from authoritarian regimes, a demonstration that two way exchange between different political systems can have positive outcomes
- 0xDEF 3y agoI don't give much about the privacy arguments because Western apps also spy on us. However it's good that we are finally responding to the unfair market conditions imposed by the Chinese government. Western app devs do not have the same access to the Chinese market as Chinese app devs have to the Western markets.
- beardyw 3y agoTrue, but the corollary is that Chinese people do not have access to as wide a range of products. So from the perspective of the freedom of the individual their situation is worse.
- eimrine 3y agoCensoursip or surveilance crisis?
- eimrine 3y agoSurveillance crisis or just a censourship?
- dang 3y agoPlease don't post the same thing twice! It makes merging threads a pain.
- tremere 3y agoI don't know if this is the right call, since it opens up a can of worms. Since it might affect free speech as a constitutional right it might make it to the Supreme Court, which might be interesting.
- Only_Spam 3y agoWhy don't we make the analogy of TikTok to alcohol? Did people of Montana voted for this or did Montana politicians follow their donors' agenda? Is FB as dangerous or more dangerous as TikTok? Why target TikTok?
- Tangurena2 3y agoLobbyists demanded it. Kentucky passed something similar earlier this year [0] - banning TikTok from state computer networks. An amendment exempted universities from the ban, but libraries are still blocked. It was signed by the governor on March 23 and went into effect that day[1]. 0 - https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/record/23rs/sb20.html https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/record/23rs/sb20.html 1 - normally, state laws go into effect at the end of the year or end of legislative session (depending on the state constitution) unless there is an "emergency" in which case it goes into effect the day it becomes law.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- falcolas 3y agoMy only consolation in this shitstorm is that it's been expanded to include "all social media applications that collect and provide users' personal information or data to a foreign adversary, or a person or entity located within a country designated as a foreign adversary." So, yeah. I guess it's time to shut 'em all down. Now we just wait for the "I didn't mean American companies" retraction.
- jameshart 3y agoWhere do you see that? As far as I can tell from the Montana legislature site, this motion to amend it along those lines failed: https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/AmdHtmH/SB0419.002.002.PDF https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/AmdHtmH/SB0419.002.002.PDF The 'current bill text' is this: https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/billhtml/SB0419.htm https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/billhtml/SB0419.htm And what it covers is: Tiktok may not operate within the territorial jurisdiction of Montana. An entity violates this prohibition when any of the following occurs within the territorial jurisdiction of Montana: (a) the operation of tiktok by the company or users; or (b) the option to download the tiktok mobile application by a mobile application store.
- falcolas 3y agoGreg Gianforte's own words, as recorded here: https://www.npr.org/2023/05/18/1176805559/montana-tiktok-ban https://www.npr.org/2023/05/18/1176805559/montana-tiktok-ban
- jameshart 3y agoRefers to a separate ban - just a gubernatorial directive - that bans TikTok from government devices: > Last December, Gianforte banned TikTok on state government electronic devices. On Wednesday, he added that the ban would expand to include "all social media applications that collect and provide users' personal information or data to a foreign adversary, or a person or entity located within a country designated as a foreign adversary."
- 3y ago
- jameshart 3y agoThe actual legislation: https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/billpdf/SB0419.pdf https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/billpdf/SB0419.pdf Seems facially unconstitutional. Will maybe force a proper court decision on whether the Bills of Attainder clause applies to corporations. Why are legislators so focused on banning TikTok, rather than regulating whatever it is that TikTok does that they don't like? Don't like data about your constituents being in the possession of a company with ownership ties to the Chinese government or communist party? Do the work to describe what kind of 'ties' are the ones that worry you, what kind of entities are the ones you don't like, what kind of data you don't like being in their hands, and write a law that codifies that.
- edgyquant 3y agoCountries have the right to ban foreign adversaries. US companies are a different problem with different solutions.
- jameshart 3y agoDo states? (edit - oops, see correction below) There's nothing in this law that would unban TikTok if its ownership were transferred to a US corporation.
- falcolas 3y agoAs I understand it, nope. States can't negotiate treaties on the US' behalf. Commerce and sanctions would fall under that as I understand it. States also can't regulate interstate trade, which I believe trying to penalize Apple and Google would constitute, since neither has a office in Montana.
- 1-6 3y agoSome states are making desperate cries for help while federally, there is little being done. It's good to see the republic still functioning.
- DubiousPusher 3y agoThis is why the "legislating from the bench" criticism always fell flat for me. America's legislative branch has been deadlocked for 40 years. History abhors a power vacuum. When one exists, the neighboring institutions will bend and stretch to fill it, distorting themselves and the whole power structure in the process.
- kurthr 3y ago[flagged]
- anigbrowl 3y agoDesperate cries for help? What injury is Tiktok inflicting on Montana?
- swayvil 3y agoHow do you ban an app? Random phone inspection?
- Nifty3929 3y ago[flagged]
- ghettoimp 3y agoThis is blatant misinformation. "Penalties in this section do not apply to users of tiktok" https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/billpdf/SB0419.pdf https://leg.mt.gov/bills/2023/billpdf/SB0419.pdf
- DubiousPusher 3y agoI imagine that they will go after the source. Basically Apple, Google, Samsung and Microsoft will have to hide the app in their respective stores for Montana users. That is, if there isn't an injunction before it even goes anywhere.
- post_break 3y agoAsk Apple to remove it from devices with billing info in that state. Fine Apple until they comply.
- galleywest200 3y agoThe bill states only downloads are banned, so probably just remove it from the App Stores.
- bedast 3y agoAs noted in the article, it bans the app from the app stores, not individual devices. It doesn't penalize individuals for having and using the app.
- dboreham 3y agoInstalled the app last night. It would be interesting to see their DAU graph for the state! Something worthwhile noting here is that the usual "politicians don't understand the technology" sentiment doesn't apply here because our governor at least knows how to code Perl, and ran a software company.
- bioemerl 3y agoWhy would you install that app on your personal phone? Even in some misplaced sense of rebellion, you're basically inviting spyware into your life.
- asynchronous 3y agoGonna back this up, from the security research I’ve read the app *uploads* over 2gb of data once installed over the course of one month, without any interaction at all from the user.
- groggo 3y agoWhat is the data? Doesn't iOS limit access to anything outside of the app? It has to ask to access contacts, photos, location. If you just use it to scroll through stupid videos, what does it even have access to?
- asynchronous 3y agoIIRC the traffic is encrypted, all TCP/IP packets but going to bytedance servers. Without interacting with the app I have no idea what it could be sending but scary to speculate.
- groggo 3y agoplease speculate. I just don't understand what it would even have access to. Are you worried about it exploiting iOS bugs? Otherwise it should only have explicit access to what I grant, right? No audio, video, files, photos, contacts, location.
- avn2109 3y agoOne underappreciated aspect of this is ban is that anyone who wants Tiktok will just go download it in Wyoming or Idaho etc, as it seems to be merely a ban on downloading the app, and not a ban on Tiktok traffic itself. So the ban will have near zero actual impact in practice (even if it somehow makes it into effect). Furthermore, it's unclear if the web app of Tiktok will be affected, or if it's only a ban on the mobile app. Source: Am Montanan
- falcolas 3y agoLast I heard, there was a "per use" fine for usage as well. Honestly, I haven't looked at this farce of a bill since it was first introduced. EDIT: S1: An entity violates this prohibition when any of the following occurs within the territorial jurisdiction of Montana: (a) the operation of tiktok by the company or users; or (b) the option to download the tiktok mobile application by a mobile application store.
- avn2109 3y agoThe article claims "...will not impose any penalties on individuals using the app". A commenter elsewhere in this thread links to the law itself, which could presumably disambiguate, though I've not read it.
- falcolas 3y agoThey plan to go after Apple and Google, fining them for use and downloads.
- onlyrealcuzzo 3y agoDoes a state even have a right to do something like this? Somehow, I feel like if California tried to ban Fox News - it would not fly. This doesn't seem that different, though I personally find it amusing that it's coming from a conservative state. I do agree TikTok is toxic trash - but I'd say the same about Fox News - and it just doesn't seem like something a state has the ability to ban.
- JdeBP 3y agoThe Guardian: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35983009 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35983009 Associated Press: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35984728 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35984728 New York Times: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35983933 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35983933 Politico: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35984023 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35984023 The Verge: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35982447 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35982447 NBC News: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35982950 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35982950 CNN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35982386 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35982386 Wall Street Journal: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35981578 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35981578 And now Reuters too. (-:
- dang 3y agoThanks! I think we've merged them all hither.
- moneywoes 3y agoWill this impact acquisition costs for d2c companies? Perhaps a sign of more stages to come?
- mikece 3y agoTomorrow's story: "Residents of Montana discover VPNs and how to use them!" Between Utah and Montana the awareness and use of VPNs is rising among the non-security-conscious, and this is a good thing.
- woooooo 3y agoI saw a BBC story the other week bemoaning how state college students were circumventing firewalls of foreign media using VPNs.. the irony seemed to be lost on them.
- RugnirViking 3y agocould you link to the story?
- woooooo 3y agohttps://www.bbc.com/news/business-64827885 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64827885
- RugnirViking 3y agothat seems to be pretty even handed to me
- mmh0000 3y agoSo, I avoided VPNs for years because they had no practical benefit. I live in Utah, and I would consider myself very technically adept. Previously, I didn't like "VPNs" because now I'm just routing all my traffic through another untrusted 3rd party. It's like choosing between two evils, would I prefer my ISP knows where I go, or some rando that I also have to pay? Worse, the "rando" (usually) requires a VPN app which could get up to all sorts of fuckery. So. yada yada yada. Well, then, two things happened back-to-back. The VPN provider Mullvad was unsuccessfully raided, and Utah passed hyper-totalitarian laws. On the recent PR news, I investigated Mullval, and... they're fantastic. You don't have to use their app; they support straight openvpn or wireguard and are Linux native. AND I can pay them in BTC, further obscuring myself. Because of Utah's law, the vast majority of my traffic is now directed over a VPN. I don't even really go to porn sites all that often. It's more the principle of it. The more the state pushes to limit and remove freedoms, the more I will do everything in my power to push the other way. It's the Hacker Mindset =D
- viraptor 3y agoSlightly off topic - I'm not sure I've heard the gov stating it plainly in the recent years: "the People's Republic of China is an adversary of the United States" (from the bill). Did I just miss it / glance over, or is this out of character for officially released gov documents?
- woooooo 3y agoI wonder how many Chinese-manufactured goods the state of Montana bought yesterday while issuing this statement.
- throwuwu 3y agoTrading with your adversaries is a good way to not start a war.
- jeswin 3y agoA $250b/year trade deficit will weaken you over time while you might just be kicking the can down the road. The generation having to fight the war will have lesser chances of winning it. Trade (especially massively imbalanced trade) with a communist dictatorship is not a good idea.
- drekk 3y ago“The United States is also a one-party state but, with typical American extravagance, they have two of them.” - Julius Nyerere, first president of Tanzania
- dkarl 3y agoIt can cut both ways, though. If your primary source for a crucial resource is a country that could potentially benefit from harming you, that can be strategically intolerable and eventually lead to finding an excuse to start a war.
- 99_00 3y agoCan state how your wondering is relavant or what argument or point you are alluding to?
- smith002 3y ago[dead]
- 99_00 3y agoIt's interesting that some oppose Musk running Twitter, it's moderation, policies, and alorithms because of his sympathies for a mainstream American political party. And at the same time carry water for TickTock who is legally obligated to cooperate with China's intelligence service in any way they require. Knowing that the Chinese regime runs genocidal slave labour rape camps and will extract and sell your organs for free speech and religious practices. I suspect that they don't realize that the CCP controlling the TickTock algorithms is more dangerous making the Q-anon shaman product manager for the algorithms at meta, Google, and Twitter.
- micromacrofoot 3y agoSeems like a little bit of a strawman, they're all bad.
- 99_00 3y agoMaybe i am misunderstanding. Are you saying that a CCP controlled social media company is as bad to America as an Elon Musk controlled social media company?
- micromacrofoot 3y agodifferent varieties/severity, neither good - arguably Musk is more directly harmful to Americans than Uyghur genocide, (which most Americans probably aren't even aware of) but it's not really an intelligent comparison and probably results in more distracting infighting than anything
- 99_00 3y agoMy argument isn't that the Uyghur genocide is harmful to Americans. My argument is that the regime that is carrying out the genocide is in control of the algorithms for a major social media company. You perfectly prove my point when you have no problem realizing the impact on Americans control of a social media has in the case of Twitter, but are completely blind to the impact of TikTok.
- fnordpiglet 3y agoCan’t wait for the injunction to hit in about 5 days.
- steviedotboston 3y agoWhy should a state my Montana be leading the way on this? Congress should have banned TikTok years ago. Anyways, good for them.
- bastardoperator 3y agoQueue the citizens of Montana leading the charge in "vpn" searches on Google. Good luck Utah!
- edsimpson 3y agoRelated, "Montana bans Telegram, WeChat, and Temu from government devices" https://www.theverge.com/2023/5/17/23727750/montana-bans-telegram-temu-wechat-other-bytedance-apps-government-devices-tiktok https://www.theverge.com/2023/5/17/23727750/montana-bans-tel...
- lykahb 3y agoI hope that this shifts the Overton window toward discussion about banning facebook, twitter and instagram. They play a major role in exacerbating the divisions in the society and the rising suicide rate. Those domestic platforms do a better job at undermining the national security than any foreign force could dream of.
- CamperBob2 3y agoHow do you reconcile this position with the First Amendment?
- lykahb 3y agoThe First Amendment guarantees freedom of expression by prohibiting Congress from restricting the press or the rights of individuals to speak freely. It is open to interpretation, but banning social platforms that do not create their content is not the same as censoring the press. At the time the amendment was conceived, it was unimaginable to have a nation-wide entity that threatens the freedom of expression other than the government. So, it may actually be in spirit of the First Amendment to control the entities which promote and censor public discourse according to their opaque internal algorithms.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- _blz2 3y agoA platform that allows unhinged free speech would be more in line, but tech players wouldn't pursue it citing hate speech/advertisements and would outright ban it.
- karaterobot 3y agoThere's nothing in the law, as far as I am aware, that requires an otherwise banned enterprise be allowed to operate because it also allows people to speak freely on the premises.
- jareklupinski 3y ago
- sergiotapia 3y agoThat's a shame because in a world of artificially inflated 10-minute youtube videos, I really enjoy tiktok's to the point short clips. If I want to see a review or a how-to or similar, I go to tiktok first because they are from normal dudes and not big channels that artificially pad their videos to 10 minutes for the ads.
- coldcode 3y agoAnd TikTok has no influencers, sure? At least on Youtube, you can see who is paying them to shill you. Every video online is potentially there to convince you to buy something, believe something, or motivate you to do something to make the creator money.
- nkjnlknlk 3y agoI find the TikTok algorithm (perhaps not the platform) to be superior at giving me content I like/need and from creators that are (seemingly) authentic. I've seen far more diversity on TikTok than YouTube and due to there being no thumbnails or titles there is less clickbait. That being said, TikTok's search capability is kind of useless.
- groggo 3y agoSeriously. I just like tiktok for scrolling through guitar or cooking videos. I'm sure there's plenty of stuff on youtube, but it's fun just to just scroll through a few quick videos when you have a free minute. Those creators don't have to be trying to sell me anything, they're just getting me on the platform, then tiktok can show normal ads every few videos.
- paulddraper 3y agoYoutube Shorts If that's your thing
- stronglikedan 3y agoMontana becomes first US state to make sideloading ubiquitous.
- barathr 3y agoI wrote up a quick analysis last night here: https://ioc.exchange/@invisv/110387246627189198 https://ioc.exchange/@invisv/110387246627189198 Here are the takeaways: * It'd be easy for Apple and Google to prevent downloads of TikTok for most users, which would also include app updates, as they have a significant amount of knowledge of users' locations and could prevent most users in Montana -- even those using a VPN -- from downloading the app or updating it. * It'd be very difficult for Montana to enforce the other piece of the TikTok ban -- if "entity" in the bill means any company, they're stuck: the state has little ability to prevent side-loading of apps on Android and users who want TikTok can access app repositories hosted out of state. There's virtually no way for ISPs inside Montana to surveil all user usage to find out if they're trying to download TikTok from a third-party repository, and even if they could there would be legal issues with the state mandating this. Fundamentally, this makes user privacy and security much worse. * Apple, Google, and ByteDance could be aggressive and use the data they have -- all three have GPS data for most or all relevant users here (i.e. TikTok users on an iPhone or Android) -- and block requests to download or use TikTok from within Montana. And they probably will, unless they get a court to block the bill. The one thing the bill banning TikTok doesn't do is the one thing that is desperately needed: actually protect user privacy, by banning the collection, aggregation, sale, and use of fine-grained user data -- by ByteDance, Meta, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, or any other.
- mrighele 3y ago> It'd be very difficult for Montana to enforce the other piece of the TikTok ban I don't know if it is technically and legally feasible in Montana, but you "just" need to block the endpoints that the app uses to fetch the data. It is not foolproof, but given that ByteDance probably has interest in keeping doing business in the rest of the USA, at least for now, it would be fineable in case it was trying to avoid the block.
- threeseed 3y agoTechnically and legally it's trivial and common. They just ask any ISPs and telcos operating in the state to ban the URL.
- MisterBastahrd 3y agoI'm never going to give a single crap about TikTok specifically being in the loving arms of the CCP as long as everyone else is just collecting my data anyway to either bombard with ads or sell to government entities. China is way down on my list regarding potential hostile actors to my personal welfare.
- Joe_Boogz 3y agoWhat VPNs should people in Montana and Utah use? Genuinely wondering the best option.
- knaik94 3y agoMullvad has options to pay by cash, bitcoin, or even a physical gift card, in addition to the usual methods. There are no usernames, everything is tied to a randomly assigned account number. It's also moving many servers to a diskless infrastructure, running off ram and supports wireguard and openvpn. https://mullvad.net/en/blog/2022/8/1/expanding-diskless-infrastructure-to-more-locations-system-transparency-stboot/ https://mullvad.net/en/blog/2022/8/1/expanding-diskless-infr...
- ChikkaChiChi 3y agoHas the government provided a state-approved application that replicates what the consumers want from TikTok? If not, people will find a way around this like they always do.
- seanmcdirmid 3y agoAnd the old people in Montana wonder why kids move out of Montana.
- DanAtC 3y agoIs there a precedent of app stores needing to enforce app restrictions on a state-by-state basis? What if Apple protests and just disables their store in MT? It would only impact at _most_ 500k people (population 1mm at 50% market share, not accounting for demographics) A huge number of angry Montanians who might vote their representatives out, but a rounding error for Apple.
- anonymouskimmer 3y agoWhy would Apple do this to help a foreign company? They have nothing to gain except a small amount of app store fees. And they'd piss off a ton of Republican and some Democrat lawmakers, not to mention the 80% of their customers who don't use TikTok. If Apple did do this to help a foreign company (or any company), it would probably fall afoul of the law: https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/dealings-supply-chain/refusal-supply https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/gui... > A firm's refusal to deal with any other person or company is lawful so long as the refusal is not the product of an anticompetitive agreement with other firms or part of a predatory or exclusionary strategy to acquire or maintain a monopoly. (emphasis mine) IANAL, so I'm sure there are other laws I am not aware of that would squelch such a move.
- MichaelZuo 3y agoThey almost certainly don't want to set the precedent of caving in to a sub-national jurisdiction's bills when they don't even have any business operations in that jurisdiction. Because then every state, province territory, etc., in the world will have an excuse. Since there are App Store users everywhere.
- anonymouskimmer 3y agoThis is what lawsuits are for, not preemptive refusal to do business with an entire state. It's a lot cheaper to code geographic controls (that they already have for national-level jurisdictions) than to only temporarily boycott even only 100k paying App store customers.
- lazyeye 3y agoWhy is this not a simple trade issue? Why do we allow China to run their social media apps in the West whilst they block all foreign apps within their own borders? How is this remotely acceptable?
- hax0ron3 3y agoAh censorship, something that much of the left and the right can agree on although they quibble about the details of exactly what and when to censor.
- mateo411 3y agoI think TikTok could easily make over $10000 a day from its Montana Audience. Although this law likely violates the 1st amendment, perhaps the best course of action is to either ignore Montana or just cut them a check.
- wnevets 3y agoIs this some that small government I've heard so much about it?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- advisedwang 3y agoEveryone is talking about the app stores, but the wording of the bill also seems to impose a duty on TikTok itself not to serve to users in Montana. That seems like the biggest sledgehammer here. I wonder about it's legality.
- AlexanderTheGr8 3y agoHow do they regulate websites? Afaik tiktok can be used with full functionality through their website, although most people ofc prefer app. And even if they try to block the domain, folks can still VPN into it. Much easier to regulate apps compared to the open? internet.
- friend_and_foe 3y agoYou know, all this nonsense could be avoided if we went back to the "if you want to ban our service build yourself a great firewall or get fucked, we don't have to enforce your laws for you" status quo. Unfortunately precedent has been set for foreign persons and corporations to be liable for violating laws of countries they're not centered in just because theyre available to communicate with freely across borders. The big ones like google went along with it for money, now I live in a world where I could potentially be extradited to a foreign country I've never set foot in for saying things on the internet to one of their citizens. So the way I see it I'm happy to watch this whole system of control go ablaze from stupid laws like this one. If authoritarians want to block certain content from their citizens they can do the censoring themselves, but if they want people to have to censor themselves or face penalties they're going to have to deal with stupid shit like this. You can't have it both ways.
- can16358p 3y agoI hate TikTok and CCP, but banning an app from use is just wrong. Want to fight TikTok addiction or privacy issues with CCP? Sure, do it. But find other ways: banning users from using it, whereas especially everybody else can access it, is a huge punch on the rights of your own people.
- mattrighetti 3y agoExactly. The only solution would be to inform users that their data is funnelled to CCP servers in very obscure ways, that’s the only right thing that you could do. Enable people to make informed decisions. Want your data stolen? Then go ahead.
- Moldoteck 3y agoyeah they could mandate tiktok to inform users after each video that data is sent to ccp
- zabana 3y agoThe thing is, most people outside the "larger ethnic group" in the US couldn't care less about their data being funneled to the CCP. The anti china/russia/<insert anything that's over GMT+3> seems to really be a WASP centric pathological obsession. Just my 2c
- teawrecks 3y agoThat's why the issue needs to be solved by legislation that regulates data collection. Targeting a specific app just because of WHO the data is going to is at best a military operation, or at worst xenophobic. Doesn't matter to me who is trying to collect my data, I want a say.
- logdap 3y agoNational security is not a uniquely "wasp" concern, which you would know if you were ever in the military. What an incredibly ignorant and racist thing to suggest.
- 3y ago
- egorfine 3y agoI live in a country where such a ban on certain "enemy" social networks was implemented a few years ago. What will happen is this. Teens will download a shit ton of VPN applications, the vast majority of which are specifically produced and marketed by the enemy to circumvent said ban. Then all users' phone traffic gets routed via the enemy VPN instead of just the social app's requests. Win-win for both sides: - the government gets populistic approval from the eldery population; - the adversary gets way more US users' data than they ever dreamed of.
- newsclues 3y agoGood excuse to crack down on VPNs that don't provide backdoors next.
- MadSudaca 3y agoLet's say establishing policies to reduce the use of TikTok in the population is the right move. What policies would you suggest?
- egorfine 3y agoThe more I think about it during the last years the less idea I have of what could be a working solution.
- jerrre 3y agoWould also depend on the reason you want to reduce it. Privacy? Data? Attention? Propaganda?
- shawabawa3 3y agoBan advertising to minors Huge fines for being caught knowingly serving ads to minors
- TeMPOraL 3y agoWhat would be the specific harm of TikTok? Is it because of China, or because of this style of social media apps? If it's because of China, then ban TikTok and subsidize a competitor app - but be serious about it. Be ready to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on keeping the app free and servers up for years, sponsoring hundreds of content creators, dragging celebrities in to produce exclusive content, burning tons of money on all kinds of loss-generating marketing bullshit, like "publish a video from $concert, best 100 videos win a Nintendo Switch", for each concert in the state/country for the next few years. Point being, if you can provide a TikTok alternative and make it extremely attractive, even if by literally giving away hundreds of dollars to each new user, then kids won't care about using TikTok anymore. Now, if it's not about China but teenage use of social media? Put an absurdly high tax on smartphones. Like 200%-1000%. That will make sure they become unavailable to a typical teenager. Beyond that? I don't think you can do much about it directly, or in the immediate term.
- sva_ 3y ago> now banned > will take effect in January 2024
- motbus 3y ago[dead]
- asne11 3y agoWho's interested in building a replacement? A dozen HN readers can surely crank out something at least as good in a matter of weeks. Could be in the right position if US government bans TikTok.
- TeMPOraL 3y agoLet's aim higher! Who want to help build the SAP of social media? Imagine selling a bespoke, turnkey solution to countries and companies around the world. Thinking about banning China from your Internet but your kids miss TikTok? We have something for you! On-prem, modular social media platform. Choose from ready made-modules: - Interaction Styles - TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, and many others. - Regulatory environment - there's one for every major bloc on the globe! You can have your TikTok, and China can have its TikTok too! Comes with automatic GDPR support, updated daily to give access to latest discovered loopholes. - Ideological Environment - a package of moderation, generation and monitoring tools, tailored to specific needs of your prospective users; choose from a wide set of ready-made configs - one for each major religious or political ideological group in every country on the planet! - Monetization strategies - advertising? More advertising? Subscription and advertising? Pick and choose! Let's do this! This is the endgame for social media and the Internet, so why wait for the world to go to shit, when we could drag it down to the gutter and make some money in the process?
- scarface_74 3y agoIf only TikTok had a website at https://TikTok.com https://TikTok.com that had the same functionality….
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- PurpleRamen 3y agoWouldn't the ban apply to all types of access? So at the end, this prevents the update-problem, but they still need to use a VPN.
- scarface_74 3y agoThey are now going to force all ISPs to block access in their state including wireless providers?
- PurpleRamen 3y agoMore like TikTok itself, maybe? I mean they are (probably) not going after the providers for transporting the downloaded app. They just plain out ban any operation of TikTok in Montana, and how this happens does not matter much. Though, it may depend on whether they understand that there is no real difference on a technical level, between the website and the app. Could also be they realize their mistake and just stop it altogether.
- 404mm 3y agoMy understanding was that the issue stemmed from having the actual app. Or at least that would make sense to me. TikTok has been surrounded by controversies since the beginning - many western countries, not just the US. I may be just crazy but providing geolocation and biometrics of 100M+ US citizens to Chinese government just does not seem like a good idea. Also keep in mind that TikTok has the ability to curate content you see. Social media in general have been found guilty of influencing elections.
- 3y ago
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- trasz4 3y agoSo, the First Amendment doesn't mean shit if banning free speech is required to make YouTube make money again.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- asix66 3y agoThis ban law ultimately won’t work. What's needed is EDUCATION...Cases in point. The only way to "ban" illicit drugs is through education. Essentially, “don’t do that shit and here is why”. The only way to "ban" abortion is, similarly, through education. Don’t screw but if you do put a coat on that thing. Make that stuff free. Social media is no different. Focus on teaching the importance of privacy and mental wellbeing. This education can and should start in your own household and families. Teach your kids, this ban won't help them.
- za3faran 3y agoBoth approaches are not mutually exclusive. Education is important, but societal and peer pressure is a thing.
- prmoustache 3y agoUnless they have servers there, there is no such thing as "operating within a territorial jurisdiction of a place”.
- Tepix 3y agoHow is TikTok collecting all that data for iOS users? The sandbox should prevent that unless they give permission for everything manually.
- chrisdfrey 3y agoThere is a lot of FUD over what data TikTok collects, but even with data from just using the app they can do a lot of profiling.
- asdfman123 3y agoThis is basically how the Opium Wars started, but with East and West roles reversed.
- 2devnull 3y agoI might be moving to Montana soon.
- rvz 3y agoThe comments in both here and especially on The Verge is extremely hilarious. This only shows that even under Biden, TikTok was getting banned regardless of Trump being in office and that did not change the outcome of the ban. Something better than a ban is to fine TikTok in the billions of dollars each time it repeats these privacy violations and pay all its users back the data it has collected, just like Facebook has done when the FTC fined them in the billions. That seems to be fair for everyone instead of this wanton reactionary cope with little action other than screaming in the comments section.
- tlogan 3y agoCan somebody explain to me how TikTok in iPhone is worse than Facebook? The say "TikTok collects a large amount of personal information, which has raised concerns about data mining and potential misuse of user data." - what information they collect and Facebook does not collect?
- thethimble 3y agoChina https://apnews.com/article/tiktok-bytedance-shou-zi-chew-8d8a6a9694357040d484670b7f4833be https://apnews.com/article/tiktok-bytedance-shou-zi-chew-8d8...
- piloto_ciego 3y agoReally, the difference is just yellow panic nonsense.
- thomastjeffery 3y agoThey can explain at you, but at the end of the day, it's all politics. I find it a much more sensible position to criticize both together, along with the rest of proprietary digital socialization platforms.
- lost_tourist 3y agoWell now it's probably okay due to scrutiny but not so long ago... https://www.thewrap.com/tiktok-circumvent-privacy-protections-user-data/ https://www.thewrap.com/tiktok-circumvent-privacy-protection...
- ninefathom 3y agoI'm a bit perplexed that there seems to be minimal discussion on the complete technical absurdity of this ban. Within the USA, there might _possibly_ be sufficient technical infrastructure available to block app downloads at a national level. Maybe. And leaving aside the myriad circumvention routes. But at the state level? It's simply not there in the way that the legislators think. Application-level data? Turn off location services. GeoIP? Nice try- mobile carriers don't reliably egress in the state from which the customer traffic originates. E911? Protected by other laws. Cell tower location? What about folks near state borders, and there's no reliable vehicle to get that data to app store operators right now anyway. What's good enough for an advertiser trying to sell concert tickets is not necessarily good enough for enforcing legal prohibitions. Effectively, to enforce this would require cooperation between government agencies, mobile carriers, and app vendors on a scale that has not be done in this country before- and with two of the three parties not even remotely interested in such cooperation. This thing is pure political theatre.
- amacalac 3y agothe ban is more on Apple and Google - preventing them making the app available. My guess is that it’ll be based on the billing address of the account tied to the device. If the billing address resides in Montana, the app won’t be shown for download. Aside from that, yes, I agree. Tough to do, and mostly theatre.
- ninefathom 3y agoRunning with the billing address example... so to circumvent the ban, all one would need is a prepaid phone plan. Service addresses are collected for those, but they're basically unused and there's no incentive on the consumer end for them to be accurate. Even on post-billed plans, getting the billing address from the mobile carrier to Google requires a degrees of cooperation that is not currently in place. Apple may have an easier time in the regard, but then again they're not likely to cooperate either.
- nikolay 3y agoJohn Dutton's decision? I'm joking, but most Social Media should be banned given all the piling research of how bad is it for youth development.
- fivetozero 3y agoa reaction to article on https://520.btw.so/when-montana-outlaws-tiktok https://520.btw.so/when-montana-outlaws-tiktok
- dazld 3y agoI'm curious if TikTok will eventually attempt to give content about PRISM an algorithm boost to try and show that US companies are not better in terms of government data access. Might help keep users on their side.
- jcrash 3y agoHaha, good.