6 ms·

The article has an inflammatory headline, obviously, because that’s how the internet works. If you read the article though the actual content does not suggest

The article has an inflammatory headline, obviously, because that’s how the internet works. If you read the article though the actual content does not suggest they were asking for anything other than the ability to ensure TikTok/Byte Dance weren’t doing anything nefarious… and anyway it fell apart when it became obvious how hopeless that was because of how shady they (Byte Dance) are.

pessimizer 3y ago
> does not suggest they were asking for anything other than the ability to ensure TikTok/Byte Dance weren’t doing anything nefarious The Chinese do not think that they are doing anything nefarious either.
- empath-nirvana 3y ago
  > The Chinese do not think that they are doing anything nefarious either. "Nefarious" is very dependent on context. The CIA spying on China is what the CIA is _supposed_ to be doing -- it's not nefarious in the US context, but surely, to the Chinese, it's "nefarious activity" and the CIA is aware of that. Surely the Chinese know that they're up to no good from the US point of view, even if it's ethically fine from their point of view.
neon_electro 3y ago
> Forbes reports that the draft agreement, dated Summer 2022, would have given the US government agencies like the Department of Justice and Department of Defense far more access to TikTok’s operations than that of any other social media company. The agreement would let agencies examine TikTok’s US facilities, records, and servers with minimal prior notice and veto the hiring of any executive involved with leading TikTok US data security organization. It would also let US agencies block changes to the app’s terms of service in the US and order the company to subject itself to various audits, all on TikTok’s dime, per Forbes. In extreme cases, the agreement would allow government organizations to demand TikTok temporarily shut off functioning in the US. Can you share evidence that US regulators are holding US-based social media companies to all of these same requirements?
- rrdharan 3y ago
  They aren’t, the point is they don’t trust Byte Dance at all, and with good reason.
- hgsgm 3y ago
  From the perspective of the US government, there's a minor differentce between US companies and foreign companies. You can spot it.
  - juanani 3y ago
    I.E protectionism
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Can you share evidence that US regulators are holding US-based social media companies to all of these same requirements? This moves goalposts. American social media companies don’t have CCP members in their senior ranks. The problem is the “records and servers” bit could let the Feds execute illegal searches on any American’s data with zero oversight. Not that we’re being mean to TikTok.
  - goodbyesf 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > Here comes the moronic ccp nonsense. Like clockwork. This isn't an argument.
      - goodbyesf 3y ago
        [flagged]
        ethanbond 3y ago

pessimizer 3y ago

> does not suggest they were asking for anything other than the ability to ensure TikTok/Byte Dance weren’t doing anything nefarious The Chinese do not think that they are doing anything nefarious either.

empath-nirvana 3y ago
> The Chinese do not think that they are doing anything nefarious either. "Nefarious" is very dependent on context. The CIA spying on China is what the CIA is _supposed_ to be doing -- it's not nefarious in the US context, but surely, to the Chinese, it's "nefarious activity" and the CIA is aware of that. Surely the Chinese know that they're up to no good from the US point of view, even if it's ethically fine from their point of view.

neon_electro 3y ago

> Forbes reports that the draft agreement, dated Summer 2022, would have given the US government agencies like the Department of Justice and Department of Defense far more access to TikTok’s operations than that of any other social media company. The agreement would let agencies examine TikTok’s US facilities, records, and servers with minimal prior notice and veto the hiring of any executive involved with leading TikTok US data security organization. It would also let US agencies block changes to the app’s terms of service in the US and order the company to subject itself to various audits, all on TikTok’s dime, per Forbes. In extreme cases, the agreement would allow government organizations to demand TikTok temporarily shut off functioning in the US. Can you share evidence that US regulators are holding US-based social media companies to all of these same requirements?

rrdharan 3y ago
They aren’t, the point is they don’t trust Byte Dance at all, and with good reason.
hgsgm 3y ago
From the perspective of the US government, there's a minor differentce between US companies and foreign companies. You can spot it.
- juanani 3y ago
  I.E protectionism
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> Can you share evidence that US regulators are holding US-based social media companies to all of these same requirements? This moves goalposts. American social media companies don’t have CCP members in their senior ranks. The problem is the “records and servers” bit could let the Feds execute illegal searches on any American’s data with zero oversight. Not that we’re being mean to TikTok.
- goodbyesf 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > Here comes the moronic ccp nonsense. Like clockwork. This isn't an argument.
    - goodbyesf 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - ethanbond 3y ago