3 ms·

It's a version of yellow scare which is a tiresome repetition of what happened in the past internments during WWII, in the 80s-90s w/ Japan, and today with Chi

by dv_dt 3y ago

It's a version of yellow scare which is a tiresome repetition of what happened in the past internments during WWII, in the 80s-90s w/ Japan, and today with China. Either tiktok the app is doing something wrong and needs controlled - but that should come in a form of regulation to apply to all social media apps. Or foreign investment ownership needs limits, but same thing, there should be a standard that applies to all foreign control concerns that should be expressed more generally than a singular app.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> Or foreign investment ownership needs limits, but same thing It’s a general foreign ownership of social media bill. We already have foreign ownership restrictions on traditional media.
- dv_dt 3y ago
  This draft [1], linked from this CNN article [2], starts with: To protect the national security of the United States from the threat posed by foreign adversary controlled applications, such as TikTok and any successor application or service and any other application or service developed or provided by ByteDance Ltd. or an entity under the control of ByteDance Ltd. And names TikTok and ByteDance specifically in it's contents which grants the power to do so, but does not suggest any particular standards why other than designations as a "Foreign Adversary". Which is basically a circular framework for bias. Would this apply to X with a large investment from Saudi Arabia for example? [1] https://d1dth6e84htgma.cloudfront.net/TIKTOK_xml_a8572d67bb.pdf https://d1dth6e84htgma.cloudfront.net/TIKTOK_xml_a8572d67bb.... [2] https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/07/tech/congress-bill-bans-tiktok-america/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/07/tech/congress-bill-bans-t...
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    That’s the summary. > Would this apply to X with a large investment from Saudi Arabia for example? No, it’s not a foreign adversary country [1]. [1] 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...
    - dv_dt 3y ago
      Specific callouts occur deeper in the bill too - and with no standard or policy or reasoning why other than appearing on a list. Ownership restrictions didn't keep Facebook from allegedly selling the space for mass influence of an election to Russia operating through a UK company. If politicians were actually looking to protect the US, regulations on social media and advertising that apply universally regardless of ownership would be much more effective. I would welcome a well built set of regs for that.
richbell 3y ago
> It's a version of yellow scare which is a tiresome repetition of what happened in the past internments during WWII, in the 80s-90s w/ Japan, and today with China. Attributing this to racism is a bit obtuse, imo. China conducts aggressive cyber warfare + espionage campaigns (see "Shady Rat"), and strictly controls which foreign companies are allowed to operate within their borders. Of course, I would like to see more scrutiny applied to ALL companies invasive practices, be it Instagram or TikTok.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
Aaronstotle 3y ago
It is pretty simple. You should not let a geopolitical rival unfettered access to your populations data. There is a reason China has banned all US tech companies, why should the U.S. allow Bytedance to push algorithms that effect 1/3rd of the U.S. Population? You can dismiss it as racism if you are ignoring the numerous reports from the last 20 years showing rampant IP theft coming out of China. The CCP will use any means they can to get an advantage, and if I were in their shoes I would do the same thing.
- logicchains 3y ago
  >You should not let a geopolitical rival unfettered access to your populations data In America the rights of the people come first, not the desires of the elites trying to lord over them. Americans don't win by letting the American government become more and more like the Chinese government. This kind of geopolitical posturing is a lose-lose game for citizens of all countries involved, who lose more and more rights in the name of beating The Enemy, and a win-win game for the elites who use The Enemy as an excuse to exert more and more control over the population.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > Americans don't win by letting the American government become more and more like the Chinese government China straight up banned us, there was no provision for local devolution.
  - bsder 3y ago
    There is no reason to extend courtesy to an entity that does not reciprocate. The rheotric around China was the engagement would cause China to become more open. It is time to admit that hypothesis has been disproven. As such, penalization and disconnect should be implemented.
- advisedwang 3y ago
  Do we really want to emulated the Chinese state in regards to freedom of speech?

by dv_dt 3y ago

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> Or foreign investment ownership needs limits, but same thing It’s a general foreign ownership of social media bill. We already have foreign ownership restrictions on traditional media.

dv_dt 3y ago
This draft [1], linked from this CNN article [2], starts with: To protect the national security of the United States from the threat posed by foreign adversary controlled applications, such as TikTok and any successor application or service and any other application or service developed or provided by ByteDance Ltd. or an entity under the control of ByteDance Ltd. And names TikTok and ByteDance specifically in it's contents which grants the power to do so, but does not suggest any particular standards why other than designations as a "Foreign Adversary". Which is basically a circular framework for bias. Would this apply to X with a large investment from Saudi Arabia for example? [1] https://d1dth6e84htgma.cloudfront.net/TIKTOK_xml_a8572d67bb.pdf https://d1dth6e84htgma.cloudfront.net/TIKTOK_xml_a8572d67bb.... [2] https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/07/tech/congress-bill-bans-tiktok-america/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/07/tech/congress-bill-bans-t...
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  That’s the summary. > Would this apply to X with a large investment from Saudi Arabia for example? No, it’s not a foreign adversary country [1]. [1] 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...
  - dv_dt 3y ago
    Specific callouts occur deeper in the bill too - and with no standard or policy or reasoning why other than appearing on a list. Ownership restrictions didn't keep Facebook from allegedly selling the space for mass influence of an election to Russia operating through a UK company. If politicians were actually looking to protect the US, regulations on social media and advertising that apply universally regardless of ownership would be much more effective. I would welcome a well built set of regs for that.

richbell 3y ago

> It's a version of yellow scare which is a tiresome repetition of what happened in the past internments during WWII, in the 80s-90s w/ Japan, and today with China. Attributing this to racism is a bit obtuse, imo. China conducts aggressive cyber warfare + espionage campaigns (see "Shady Rat"), and strictly controls which foreign companies are allowed to operate within their borders. Of course, I would like to see more scrutiny applied to ALL companies invasive practices, be it Instagram or TikTok.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

Aaronstotle 3y ago

It is pretty simple. You should not let a geopolitical rival unfettered access to your populations data. There is a reason China has banned all US tech companies, why should the U.S. allow Bytedance to push algorithms that effect 1/3rd of the U.S. Population? You can dismiss it as racism if you are ignoring the numerous reports from the last 20 years showing rampant IP theft coming out of China. The CCP will use any means they can to get an advantage, and if I were in their shoes I would do the same thing.

logicchains 3y ago
>You should not let a geopolitical rival unfettered access to your populations data In America the rights of the people come first, not the desires of the elites trying to lord over them. Americans don't win by letting the American government become more and more like the Chinese government. This kind of geopolitical posturing is a lose-lose game for citizens of all countries involved, who lose more and more rights in the name of beating The Enemy, and a win-win game for the elites who use The Enemy as an excuse to exert more and more control over the population.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Americans don't win by letting the American government become more and more like the Chinese government China straight up banned us, there was no provision for local devolution.
- bsder 3y ago
  There is no reason to extend courtesy to an entity that does not reciprocate. The rheotric around China was the engagement would cause China to become more open. It is time to admit that hypothesis has been disproven. As such, penalization and disconnect should be implemented.
advisedwang 3y ago
Do we really want to emulated the Chinese state in regards to freedom of speech?