8 ms·

One 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 d

One 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 ago
Last 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 ago
  The 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 ago
    They plan to go after Apple and Google, fining them for use and downloads.
- onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago
  Does 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.
  - falcolas 3y ago
    As I understand it, no. Montana would have to be effectively regulating interstate trade since neither Apple nor Google have offices here. Plus, the whole "negotiate commerce and treaties with foreign entities" thing.
    - amanaplanacanal 3y ago
      The Supreme Court just upheld California rules about the sale of pork. Looking at it strictly from the interstate commerce view, this doesn’t appear much different.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
    - wombatpm 3y ago
      So can apple turn off all iphones in Montana in retaliation. Bet it would be easier/cheaper to cut off those customers than implement any changes. Android phone makes could follow suit
      - falcolas 3y ago
        It'd be hard to identify a phone associated with a "Montana citizen". Not impossible, but I think that based on Apple and Google's comments on these laws that they haven't built the functionality in. GeoIP doesn't work because carriers (especially in Montana) tend to assign IPs from surrounding states as much as they do local cities. When I'm on the cell network, I'm regularly identified as coming out of Denver. Phone number area codes are equally useless, since half the folks I know here in Montana have area codes from outside states. GPS would be the best bet, though I feel like even that would have some major caveats (the use would have to be decoupled from the location services controls/displays, something they don't do for even their own apps right now). Also, people rely on cellphones for emergency services. A manufacturer shutting down phones would probably expose them to some serious liabilities.
- jameshart 3y ago
  "An entity" is defined as either TikTok, or an app store. Individuals can not violate this statute.
  - falcolas 3y ago
    The entity is Apple/Google. But an end user using ticktok constitutes a violation for which Apple/Google is liable.
    - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
      > (a) the operation of tiktok by the company or users; or I don't see how owners of iOS or Android phones can be in any way said to be users of Apple or Google. At best this would apply to TikTok itself, or to companies which supply phones to employees.
      - jameshart 3y ago
        If ‘the company’ (unclear who that refers to. Bad statute-writing. Assume it means the same thing as entity but a court could interpret it however it chooses) or a ‘user’ (whoever that is) ‘operates’ the TikTok app in the territorial jurisdiction of Montana (insert your own interpretation of ‘operate’ and ‘in’) then a violation occurs for which ‘an entity’ is liable. So if someone inside Montana launches the TikTok app on an iPhone either an App Store (presumably Apple’s) or TikTok itself is liable for that violation.
AbrahamParangi 3y ago
These addiction apps rely on the activation energy to keep slurping on the dopamine straw be ~0. I bet if you forced a 10 second boot time to the app you would reduce usage by 40%.
seanw444 3y ago
Or you could just not even need to go to another state. People will learn to use a VPN.
TrainedMonkey 3y ago
Disagree with zero impact, it is a question of accessibility. Downloading an app is easy, going to another state to download an app is significantly harder. You are right that this does not stop determined people from downloading TikTok, but it definitely will slow down user growth in Montana... and open the door to further regulation in the future.
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  I believe this doesn't prohibit users from setting their phone/App Store locations to another country and downloading it.
AlwaysRock 3y ago
Also am Montanan and Wyoming or Idaho are far away for some of us. I don't know many people who would drive multiple hours to get an app. But sure, anyone who wants it badly enough will be able to get it. It doesnt seem like the point is a total all out ban though. It's a deterrent for the general public who will default to not downloading now rather than defaulting to downloading.
asynchronous 3y ago
The ban itself seems more geared at restricting Bytedance’s ability to operate (and fine them) and less about preventing the people of Montana from using it, especially since there’s no ISP or traffic restriction on it.
greenhearth 3y ago
The point of censorship is not really to ban something outright. It's to show that a thing can be banned, that this thing is not safe from just doing whatever it wants. It is mostly to assert a dominance over a socio-cultural domain and to establish an identity by negation. The initiators of the ban probably do not believe the banning will work either. The main point of the ban is the enforcement of the ban, not the ban itself. It is also done out of fear, to undermine a disrupting element of the established order, which Tik Tok certainly is. I mean, it's pretty much brain poison lol
justin66 3y ago
> anyone who wants Tiktok will just go download it in Wyoming or Idaho etc Someone needs to setup a nonprofit that will transport a user's phone to a free state and setup TikTok for a modest fee. The nonprofit could use the money to reimburse the women and transgender people who now need to travel to free states for some of their health care.
activiation 3y ago
> anyone who wants Tiktok will just go download it in Wyoming or Idaho Isn't it easier and cheaper to use a vpn?
jasmer 3y ago
It will have a big effect. Information funnels don't work by such hyper rational actions such as 'going to a different state to do something'. That won't happen. TT use will fall dramatically, and given the nature of 'tipping points and critical masses' - it will change things. The 'strategic' issue, is that this may be the US doing a bit of 'dipping toes in the water' in a small state, before taking broader action, which I think they will do.

falcolas 3y ago

Last 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 ago
The 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 ago
  They plan to go after Apple and Google, fining them for use and downloads.
onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago
Does 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.
- falcolas 3y ago
  As I understand it, no. Montana would have to be effectively regulating interstate trade since neither Apple nor Google have offices here. Plus, the whole "negotiate commerce and treaties with foreign entities" thing.
  - amanaplanacanal 3y ago
    The Supreme Court just upheld California rules about the sale of pork. Looking at it strictly from the interstate commerce view, this doesn’t appear much different.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - wombatpm 3y ago
    So can apple turn off all iphones in Montana in retaliation. Bet it would be easier/cheaper to cut off those customers than implement any changes. Android phone makes could follow suit
    - falcolas 3y ago
      It'd be hard to identify a phone associated with a "Montana citizen". Not impossible, but I think that based on Apple and Google's comments on these laws that they haven't built the functionality in. GeoIP doesn't work because carriers (especially in Montana) tend to assign IPs from surrounding states as much as they do local cities. When I'm on the cell network, I'm regularly identified as coming out of Denver. Phone number area codes are equally useless, since half the folks I know here in Montana have area codes from outside states. GPS would be the best bet, though I feel like even that would have some major caveats (the use would have to be decoupled from the location services controls/displays, something they don't do for even their own apps right now). Also, people rely on cellphones for emergency services. A manufacturer shutting down phones would probably expose them to some serious liabilities.
jameshart 3y ago
"An entity" is defined as either TikTok, or an app store. Individuals can not violate this statute.
- falcolas 3y ago
  The entity is Apple/Google. But an end user using ticktok constitutes a violation for which Apple/Google is liable.
  - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
    > (a) the operation of tiktok by the company or users; or I don't see how owners of iOS or Android phones can be in any way said to be users of Apple or Google. At best this would apply to TikTok itself, or to companies which supply phones to employees.
    - jameshart 3y ago
      If ‘the company’ (unclear who that refers to. Bad statute-writing. Assume it means the same thing as entity but a court could interpret it however it chooses) or a ‘user’ (whoever that is) ‘operates’ the TikTok app in the territorial jurisdiction of Montana (insert your own interpretation of ‘operate’ and ‘in’) then a violation occurs for which ‘an entity’ is liable. So if someone inside Montana launches the TikTok app on an iPhone either an App Store (presumably Apple’s) or TikTok itself is liable for that violation.

AbrahamParangi 3y ago

These addiction apps rely on the activation energy to keep slurping on the dopamine straw be ~0. I bet if you forced a 10 second boot time to the app you would reduce usage by 40%.

seanw444 3y ago

Or you could just not even need to go to another state. People will learn to use a VPN.

TrainedMonkey 3y ago

Disagree with zero impact, it is a question of accessibility. Downloading an app is easy, going to another state to download an app is significantly harder. You are right that this does not stop determined people from downloading TikTok, but it definitely will slow down user growth in Montana... and open the door to further regulation in the future.

MichaelZuo 3y ago
I believe this doesn't prohibit users from setting their phone/App Store locations to another country and downloading it.

AlwaysRock 3y ago

Also am Montanan and Wyoming or Idaho are far away for some of us. I don't know many people who would drive multiple hours to get an app. But sure, anyone who wants it badly enough will be able to get it. It doesnt seem like the point is a total all out ban though. It's a deterrent for the general public who will default to not downloading now rather than defaulting to downloading.

asynchronous 3y ago

The ban itself seems more geared at restricting Bytedance’s ability to operate (and fine them) and less about preventing the people of Montana from using it, especially since there’s no ISP or traffic restriction on it.

greenhearth 3y ago

The point of censorship is not really to ban something outright. It's to show that a thing can be banned, that this thing is not safe from just doing whatever it wants. It is mostly to assert a dominance over a socio-cultural domain and to establish an identity by negation. The initiators of the ban probably do not believe the banning will work either. The main point of the ban is the enforcement of the ban, not the ban itself. It is also done out of fear, to undermine a disrupting element of the established order, which Tik Tok certainly is. I mean, it's pretty much brain poison lol

justin66 3y ago

> anyone who wants Tiktok will just go download it in Wyoming or Idaho etc Someone needs to setup a nonprofit that will transport a user's phone to a free state and setup TikTok for a modest fee. The nonprofit could use the money to reimburse the women and transgender people who now need to travel to free states for some of their health care.

activiation 3y ago

> anyone who wants Tiktok will just go download it in Wyoming or Idaho Isn't it easier and cheaper to use a vpn?

jasmer 3y ago

It will have a big effect. Information funnels don't work by such hyper rational actions such as 'going to a different state to do something'. That won't happen. TT use will fall dramatically, and given the nature of 'tipping points and critical masses' - it will change things. The 'strategic' issue, is that this may be the US doing a bit of 'dipping toes in the water' in a small state, before taking broader action, which I think they will do.