3 ms·

> There are several domestic entities (governmental and non) that I would consider much bigger threats to me We can address multiple threats at once, and are n

> There are several domestic entities (governmental and non) that I would consider much bigger threats to me We can address multiple threats at once, and are not compelled to address them in priority order. Any improvement is good. > if you're not willing to let people read/watch widely and make up their own minds This seems a very weak argument. Of course nobody wants to make it illegal to see propaganda. But if you think propaganda doesn't work, then I've got a bridge to sell you. Yes, there are lots of kinds and sources and degrees of propaganda, from every side. But it exists on a spectrum - and when it's being controlled by one country, covertly, for the consumption of another country, with whom you have a tense military standoff, then it's a little more insidious than the "let the people decide!" stance you're advocating.

lmm 2y ago
> We can address multiple threats at once, and are not compelled to address them in priority order. Any improvement is good. Not necessarily. A balance of power can be better for us regular folks at the bottom. Frankly I feel safer in a world where there's at least some non-US social media than a world where people who run the US run everything and no-one can call them out. > Of course nobody wants to make it illegal to see propaganda. Then what exactly is this bill aiming for?
- verdverm 2y ago
  A European social media company would not be facing the same backlash Russia, China, and Iran are at war with the West, the West has not acknowledged it widely yet
  - lmm 2y ago
    > A European social media company would not be facing the same backlash Maybe. Or maybe the US would find some excuse to ban them too. Or the same one - remember the US considers it appropriate to spy on and read the emails of the German chancellor. Conveniently, there isn't any major European social media to compare to.
- knodi123 2y ago
  > at least some non-US social media That's not the issue, and it's disingenuous to suggest otherwise. It's not the non-US source, it's the governmental control for specific purposes > Then what exactly is this bill aiming for? Not making it illegal to see- just not making it easy for china to do covertly on a broad scale.
  - lmm 2y ago
    > That's not the issue, and it's disingenuous to suggest otherwise. > It's not the non-US source, it's the governmental control for specific purposes Perhaps. Or perhaps it's the US that's being disingenuous, and the real issue is that TikTok threatens what's otherwise a total US dominance of social media. (And note that the national security letter system means that the US has a similar level of governmental control)

lmm 2y ago

> We can address multiple threats at once, and are not compelled to address them in priority order. Any improvement is good. Not necessarily. A balance of power can be better for us regular folks at the bottom. Frankly I feel safer in a world where there's at least some non-US social media than a world where people who run the US run everything and no-one can call them out. > Of course nobody wants to make it illegal to see propaganda. Then what exactly is this bill aiming for?

verdverm 2y ago
A European social media company would not be facing the same backlash Russia, China, and Iran are at war with the West, the West has not acknowledged it widely yet
- lmm 2y ago
  > A European social media company would not be facing the same backlash Maybe. Or maybe the US would find some excuse to ban them too. Or the same one - remember the US considers it appropriate to spy on and read the emails of the German chancellor. Conveniently, there isn't any major European social media to compare to.
knodi123 2y ago
> at least some non-US social media That's not the issue, and it's disingenuous to suggest otherwise. It's not the non-US source, it's the governmental control for specific purposes > Then what exactly is this bill aiming for? Not making it illegal to see- just not making it easy for china to do covertly on a broad scale.
- lmm 2y ago
  > That's not the issue, and it's disingenuous to suggest otherwise. > It's not the non-US source, it's the governmental control for specific purposes Perhaps. Or perhaps it's the US that's being disingenuous, and the real issue is that TikTok threatens what's otherwise a total US dominance of social media. (And note that the national security letter system means that the US has a similar level of governmental control)