9 ms·

Of course it’s better when we do it to ourselves than when an outsider does it. It’s rational for a country to prevent its main adversary from collecting massi

Of course it’s better when we do it to ourselves than when an outsider does it. It’s rational for a country to prevent its main adversary from collecting massive amounts of data on its people and to prevent its adversary from getting people addicted to an app that has negative social consequences. After banning TikTok people will naturally start to wonder about regulating Facebook and other social media and this would be a good thing.

jajko 3y ago
Europe's main adversary and existential threat ain't no China, its russia. Has been, is and probably always will be. Next, at least historically, with a huge gap from first, would be Turkey. We are not top dog and thus don't compete with China in any way apart from usual economical stuff. I bet this move is more to please US to show we are still aligned, otherwise we would be banning all meta products and couple more left and right.
- skhunted 3y ago
  China is an adversary to Europe. You may not see it as the main one but it is one. Don’t have to always target the main adversary. European security is dependent on American guarantees and as such it is in Europe’s interest to not deviate too far from America’s foreign policy goals. Especially when there is a major war going on in Europe caused by its main rival. Even so Europe has targeted America’s most powerful corporations for regulation. This is a good thing. Maybe America will someday follow Europe’s example.
  - rjzzleep 3y ago
    > China is an adversary to Europe It may be now, but not because of China, but because of the disastrous policies of the EU commission that cannibalized its own industrial base. > European security is dependent on American guarantees It is now, because De Gaulle and Adenauer were under massive attack by the Atlanticists when they tried to establish a sovereign European security infrastructure. The CIA, the BND and the Spiegel actually were instrumental to that. The crazy thing is that America would be far more powerful if it empowered its allies rather than cannibalizing them.
    - skhunted 3y ago
      It doesn’t matter why Europe is dependent on American guarantees when we are discussing the state of the world as it is now. Perhaps the information you’ve provided would be helpful in developing a long term goal of non-dependence on the U.S. military.
- richrichie 3y ago
  Russians lost 1 in 7 men to defeat nazis i.e. to save Europe from Europe. From a historical point of view, it is the other way around. Germans, French and the English always had a hard on for the slavs. They desperately wanted those resource rich, strategically located lands. They still do.
  - skhunted 3y ago
    It does not matter what happened historically. We are talking about what is happening now. The Baltics, Poland, Romania, etc. see Russia as a threat and not their NATO allies.
    - iszomer 3y ago
      You'd be amazed at the length of time people will hold grudges; to the point where it's engrained into their culture.
      - skhunted 3y ago
        But the nations I mentioned see Russia as a threat and not their NATO allies. This is what we are discussing. What does it matter that some people hold grudges for a long time when that isn’t pertinent to the discussion at hand?
    - rufus_foreman 3y ago
      >> It does not matter what happened historically I believe the opposite of this, and I believe that you cannot understand what is happening now without understanding what happened historically.
      - skhunted 3y ago
        Right now, Poland, the Baltics and Romania fear Russian agression and are very much opposed to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. This is the present reality and that at some point in the past other nations were more feared than Russia is of no consequence on the present reality. Russia is a personalist dictatorship. It's actions are at the whims of it's dictator. It does not matter what actually happened historically to understand the present reality. What does matter is how one person views history and how that influences his decisions. But this only matters as it pertains to predicting his reactions/actions. For instance if Putin beleives that the U.S. is the cause of all that is wrong in Europe then it doesn't matter if he is right/wrong. What matters is that he believes this and acts on this belief. Knowing his view of history is important but it in no way has any bearing on wether or not nations fear Russia at this moment in time.
- foepys 3y ago
  EU and Russian economies are not liked in significant ways anymore. Russia was the number one natural gas supplier but has kicked itself off that position with the invasion of Ukraine. Meanwhile the EU exports massive amounts of goods and intellectual property into China. China is also controlling the vast majority of rare earth supply. If China were to cut ties with the EU, the EU economy would tank massively. China is also known to supply Russia with chips for their weapon systems, which means they work together in defense matters and if Russia is a threat, then China is, too.
  - richrichie 3y ago
    That's right, they did blow up their own pipeline to Germany.
- glimshe 3y ago
  Russia is a minor player compared to China, a distraction that was welcomed by China with open arms as it helps divide and weaken the West. I understand that Russia has a much bigger impact on Europe than on the US, but strategically speaking, China is the only one actually capable of influencing the world to embrace despotism and collectivism at the expense of freedom.
  - jajko 3y ago
    Minor player from US perspective maybe since both are geographically far from you, but russia keeps consistently threatening to nuke all European cities (last time they told we need to expect 250 million casualties), they wage war that top russian leadership repeatedly stated ends when they reach Atlantic ocean. This won't and shouldn't be ignored. Now we all know at this point what relationship russia has generally with truth, but for imminent threat (next few decades), we worry at murderers on our doorstep and stating openly they want to enslave and kill us, rather than something remote that may be a problem in few decades, maybe. Imminent military/existential threat > economical competition, always. China ain't exporting despotism, I am not aware of a single country falling into this category. russia on the other hand, almost 100 years of consistent achievements in that space. This also comes from past and quite recent experience - eastern part of Europe was enslaved by soviets/russia for 4 decades. I've grown up in one such place, its destroyed for generations, and its not something I'll ever forgive them. China? Nothing. You just can't compare these threats. Sure we are aligned with US as much as we can, but US acts in its own priorities, which sometimes are directly against our own. US spies on us, wages trade wars with us. US has Trump. And US is currently giving a gigantic FU with blocking help to Ukraine, we all know and see daily consequences, and we all know Europe's security from Russia ain't top US priority now. So lets be a bit honest here.
  - alephknoll 3y ago
    > Russia is a minor player compared to China, a distraction that was welcomed by China with open arms as it helps divide and weaken the West. How does that follow? The war united the west, not divide it. > China is the only one actually capable of influencing the world to embrace despotism and collectivism at the expense of freedom. You mean china is the one forcing collectivism ( EU ) on europe? What is 'the west' other than collectivism? So many stupid people watching stupid youtube videos and regurgitating nonsense. You probably have a brain. Try using it sometimes. The most despotic entities in the world isn't china, it's the US and the EU. The most collectivist entities it the world isn't china, it's 'the west'. Is china forcing everyone to be like them? Are they exporting communism everywhere? No. Guess who is trying to force everyone to be like them? The west.
- mschuster91 3y ago
  I agree that more regulatory effort is needed against Meta and YouTube, but at least there we have actual entities in our sphere of influence that our democratic systems can hold accountable. Anything China however, we are reliant on the goodwill of a dictatorship. And that cannot stand longer, especially as China is not giving us reciprocal access - Youtube and Facebook for example are banned there, so it is only fair to do the same against anything Chinese.
alephknoll 3y ago
> After banning TikTok people will naturally start to wonder about regulating Facebook and other social media and this would be a good thing. It's not 'people' demanding anything. It's the elites. Why would the elites want to ban facebook or any social media they control. Not to mention facebook, reddit, youtube, etc are much older than tiktok.
- skhunted 3y ago
  If Tiktok gets banned perhaps people (non elites) will start wondering about regulating other social media. It’s a desire on my part that this occurs. I’m not stating that it will occur or has occurred.
  - lbro 3y ago
    No need to justify everything. Just take the L and move on.
    - skhunted 3y ago
      What L? I clarified my meaning because someone interpreted what I wrote in a way that I did not intend. I think it is common to clarify when appropriate.
rambojohnson 3y ago
except that you're essentially endorsing a dangerous form of nationalism and rationalizing domestic surveillance by suggesting it's acceptable for our own government and companies to manipulate and monitor us but not for foreign entities, to say nothing about how naive it is to think domestic companies will later come around to regulating themselves. this is exactly the double standard that not only undermines the principles of fairness and privacy but also paves the way for greater acceptance of intrusive surveillance under the guise of security.....
- skhunted 3y ago
  You should reread what I wrote. In particular, how does my last sentence, After banning TikTok people will naturally start to wonder about regulating Facebook and other social media and this would be a good thing. give the impression that I for the things you claim I’m for? You did not understand what was written. It is human nature to find that some actions done by your own society are more acceptable than when done by another society. The CIA drugging Americans is a lot more palatable to Americans than if Chinese spy agencies did that. Neither is good but one garners much less outrage than the other. This was my point. And by regulation obviously I was referring to government regulation.

jajko 3y ago

Europe's main adversary and existential threat ain't no China, its russia. Has been, is and probably always will be. Next, at least historically, with a huge gap from first, would be Turkey. We are not top dog and thus don't compete with China in any way apart from usual economical stuff. I bet this move is more to please US to show we are still aligned, otherwise we would be banning all meta products and couple more left and right.

skhunted 3y ago
China is an adversary to Europe. You may not see it as the main one but it is one. Don’t have to always target the main adversary. European security is dependent on American guarantees and as such it is in Europe’s interest to not deviate too far from America’s foreign policy goals. Especially when there is a major war going on in Europe caused by its main rival. Even so Europe has targeted America’s most powerful corporations for regulation. This is a good thing. Maybe America will someday follow Europe’s example.
- rjzzleep 3y ago
  > China is an adversary to Europe It may be now, but not because of China, but because of the disastrous policies of the EU commission that cannibalized its own industrial base. > European security is dependent on American guarantees It is now, because De Gaulle and Adenauer were under massive attack by the Atlanticists when they tried to establish a sovereign European security infrastructure. The CIA, the BND and the Spiegel actually were instrumental to that. The crazy thing is that America would be far more powerful if it empowered its allies rather than cannibalizing them.
  - skhunted 3y ago
    It doesn’t matter why Europe is dependent on American guarantees when we are discussing the state of the world as it is now. Perhaps the information you’ve provided would be helpful in developing a long term goal of non-dependence on the U.S. military.
richrichie 3y ago
Russians lost 1 in 7 men to defeat nazis i.e. to save Europe from Europe. From a historical point of view, it is the other way around. Germans, French and the English always had a hard on for the slavs. They desperately wanted those resource rich, strategically located lands. They still do.
- skhunted 3y ago
  It does not matter what happened historically. We are talking about what is happening now. The Baltics, Poland, Romania, etc. see Russia as a threat and not their NATO allies.
  - iszomer 3y ago
    You'd be amazed at the length of time people will hold grudges; to the point where it's engrained into their culture.
    - skhunted 3y ago
      But the nations I mentioned see Russia as a threat and not their NATO allies. This is what we are discussing. What does it matter that some people hold grudges for a long time when that isn’t pertinent to the discussion at hand?
  - rufus_foreman 3y ago
    >> It does not matter what happened historically I believe the opposite of this, and I believe that you cannot understand what is happening now without understanding what happened historically.
    - skhunted 3y ago
      Right now, Poland, the Baltics and Romania fear Russian agression and are very much opposed to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. This is the present reality and that at some point in the past other nations were more feared than Russia is of no consequence on the present reality. Russia is a personalist dictatorship. It's actions are at the whims of it's dictator. It does not matter what actually happened historically to understand the present reality. What does matter is how one person views history and how that influences his decisions. But this only matters as it pertains to predicting his reactions/actions. For instance if Putin beleives that the U.S. is the cause of all that is wrong in Europe then it doesn't matter if he is right/wrong. What matters is that he believes this and acts on this belief. Knowing his view of history is important but it in no way has any bearing on wether or not nations fear Russia at this moment in time.
foepys 3y ago
EU and Russian economies are not liked in significant ways anymore. Russia was the number one natural gas supplier but has kicked itself off that position with the invasion of Ukraine. Meanwhile the EU exports massive amounts of goods and intellectual property into China. China is also controlling the vast majority of rare earth supply. If China were to cut ties with the EU, the EU economy would tank massively. China is also known to supply Russia with chips for their weapon systems, which means they work together in defense matters and if Russia is a threat, then China is, too.
- richrichie 3y ago
  That's right, they did blow up their own pipeline to Germany.
glimshe 3y ago
Russia is a minor player compared to China, a distraction that was welcomed by China with open arms as it helps divide and weaken the West. I understand that Russia has a much bigger impact on Europe than on the US, but strategically speaking, China is the only one actually capable of influencing the world to embrace despotism and collectivism at the expense of freedom.
- jajko 3y ago
  Minor player from US perspective maybe since both are geographically far from you, but russia keeps consistently threatening to nuke all European cities (last time they told we need to expect 250 million casualties), they wage war that top russian leadership repeatedly stated ends when they reach Atlantic ocean. This won't and shouldn't be ignored. Now we all know at this point what relationship russia has generally with truth, but for imminent threat (next few decades), we worry at murderers on our doorstep and stating openly they want to enslave and kill us, rather than something remote that may be a problem in few decades, maybe. Imminent military/existential threat > economical competition, always. China ain't exporting despotism, I am not aware of a single country falling into this category. russia on the other hand, almost 100 years of consistent achievements in that space. This also comes from past and quite recent experience - eastern part of Europe was enslaved by soviets/russia for 4 decades. I've grown up in one such place, its destroyed for generations, and its not something I'll ever forgive them. China? Nothing. You just can't compare these threats. Sure we are aligned with US as much as we can, but US acts in its own priorities, which sometimes are directly against our own. US spies on us, wages trade wars with us. US has Trump. And US is currently giving a gigantic FU with blocking help to Ukraine, we all know and see daily consequences, and we all know Europe's security from Russia ain't top US priority now. So lets be a bit honest here.
- alephknoll 3y ago
  > Russia is a minor player compared to China, a distraction that was welcomed by China with open arms as it helps divide and weaken the West. How does that follow? The war united the west, not divide it. > China is the only one actually capable of influencing the world to embrace despotism and collectivism at the expense of freedom. You mean china is the one forcing collectivism ( EU ) on europe? What is 'the west' other than collectivism? So many stupid people watching stupid youtube videos and regurgitating nonsense. You probably have a brain. Try using it sometimes. The most despotic entities in the world isn't china, it's the US and the EU. The most collectivist entities it the world isn't china, it's 'the west'. Is china forcing everyone to be like them? Are they exporting communism everywhere? No. Guess who is trying to force everyone to be like them? The west.
mschuster91 3y ago
I agree that more regulatory effort is needed against Meta and YouTube, but at least there we have actual entities in our sphere of influence that our democratic systems can hold accountable. Anything China however, we are reliant on the goodwill of a dictatorship. And that cannot stand longer, especially as China is not giving us reciprocal access - Youtube and Facebook for example are banned there, so it is only fair to do the same against anything Chinese.

alephknoll 3y ago

> After banning TikTok people will naturally start to wonder about regulating Facebook and other social media and this would be a good thing. It's not 'people' demanding anything. It's the elites. Why would the elites want to ban facebook or any social media they control. Not to mention facebook, reddit, youtube, etc are much older than tiktok.

skhunted 3y ago
If Tiktok gets banned perhaps people (non elites) will start wondering about regulating other social media. It’s a desire on my part that this occurs. I’m not stating that it will occur or has occurred.
- lbro 3y ago
  No need to justify everything. Just take the L and move on.
  - skhunted 3y ago
    What L? I clarified my meaning because someone interpreted what I wrote in a way that I did not intend. I think it is common to clarify when appropriate.

rambojohnson 3y ago

except that you're essentially endorsing a dangerous form of nationalism and rationalizing domestic surveillance by suggesting it's acceptable for our own government and companies to manipulate and monitor us but not for foreign entities, to say nothing about how naive it is to think domestic companies will later come around to regulating themselves. this is exactly the double standard that not only undermines the principles of fairness and privacy but also paves the way for greater acceptance of intrusive surveillance under the guise of security.....

skhunted 3y ago
You should reread what I wrote. In particular, how does my last sentence, After banning TikTok people will naturally start to wonder about regulating Facebook and other social media and this would be a good thing. give the impression that I for the things you claim I’m for? You did not understand what was written. It is human nature to find that some actions done by your own society are more acceptable than when done by another society. The CIA drugging Americans is a lot more palatable to Americans than if Chinese spy agencies did that. Neither is good but one garners much less outrage than the other. This was my point. And by regulation obviously I was referring to government regulation.