5 ms·

It's amazing the lengths we'll go in the United States to avoid passing a comprehensive national privacy protections law.

rusty_venture 3y ago
A Chinese company isn't bound by US laws, so this is a necessary precursor to that. Edit: I stand corrected, they are bound by our laws, but it's orders of magnitude easier to enforce those laws on a company based in the US than a company based in China.
- mikeyouse 3y ago
  If they operate in the US, they certainly are.
  - tivert 3y ago
    > If they operate in the US, they certainly are. Theoretically, yes. But the US isn't a police state where their activities would be constantly monitored in great detail for compliance. There's a lot they could do under the radar, and a lot of groundwork they could lay for some future inappropriate action.
- notaustinpowers 3y ago
  If it wants to operate in the US, yes it does. For the same reason that US companies are complying with EU GDPR/DMA laws.
- barrkel 3y ago
  Normally how this works is that national laws dictate what an app can do when operating in the nation's territory, and it's then up to the app owner to decide whether they want to do business in that nation's territory or not. This is how EU rules apply to US tech companies. US rules for Chinese tech companies is no different in principle. IMO however the problem isn't privacy, it's being able to stick a thumb on the algorithmic feed and control the information consumption of a slice of society. And TikTok isn't the only problem, it's broadly applicable across consumer tech.
sickofparadox 3y ago
One could hope that this is a brick in the path towards a solid, comprehensive privacy law at the national level. Especially given bipartisan criticism of "home grown" spying platforms such as Facebook and Google, it certainly doesn't seem impossible (just unlikely).
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> to avoid passing a comprehensive national privacy protections law It’s unclear there is support for that. I’ve worked on privacy issues. Virtually nobody calls in support of them. This, on the other hand, is a national security bill. Every elected I know is being inundated from both sides.
- thomastjeffery 3y ago
  Privacy is not an engaging issue. It isn't controversial to most people. The problem is that our first-past-the-post voting system naturally prioritizes engagement over everything else. That's why our elections are always about controversy, and never about progress.
ryandvm 3y ago
Privacy isn't the main problem. Having an mildly adversarial nation state wielding a massive propaganda firehouse on US citizens is the bigger issue.

rusty_venture 3y ago

A Chinese company isn't bound by US laws, so this is a necessary precursor to that. Edit: I stand corrected, they are bound by our laws, but it's orders of magnitude easier to enforce those laws on a company based in the US than a company based in China.

mikeyouse 3y ago
If they operate in the US, they certainly are.
- tivert 3y ago
  > If they operate in the US, they certainly are. Theoretically, yes. But the US isn't a police state where their activities would be constantly monitored in great detail for compliance. There's a lot they could do under the radar, and a lot of groundwork they could lay for some future inappropriate action.
notaustinpowers 3y ago
If it wants to operate in the US, yes it does. For the same reason that US companies are complying with EU GDPR/DMA laws.
barrkel 3y ago
Normally how this works is that national laws dictate what an app can do when operating in the nation's territory, and it's then up to the app owner to decide whether they want to do business in that nation's territory or not. This is how EU rules apply to US tech companies. US rules for Chinese tech companies is no different in principle. IMO however the problem isn't privacy, it's being able to stick a thumb on the algorithmic feed and control the information consumption of a slice of society. And TikTok isn't the only problem, it's broadly applicable across consumer tech.

sickofparadox 3y ago

One could hope that this is a brick in the path towards a solid, comprehensive privacy law at the national level. Especially given bipartisan criticism of "home grown" spying platforms such as Facebook and Google, it certainly doesn't seem impossible (just unlikely).

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> to avoid passing a comprehensive national privacy protections law It’s unclear there is support for that. I’ve worked on privacy issues. Virtually nobody calls in support of them. This, on the other hand, is a national security bill. Every elected I know is being inundated from both sides.

thomastjeffery 3y ago
Privacy is not an engaging issue. It isn't controversial to most people. The problem is that our first-past-the-post voting system naturally prioritizes engagement over everything else. That's why our elections are always about controversy, and never about progress.

ryandvm 3y ago

Privacy isn't the main problem. Having an mildly adversarial nation state wielding a massive propaganda firehouse on US citizens is the bigger issue.