11 ms·

Reciprocity is key. Google and Facebook and most Western web services are blocked in China. If that is the case, then there should be no complaint with blockin

• solaarphunk 2y ago
  They are blocked because they don’t censor content. If they did agree to, they would be allowed - just like Microsoft, Bing, Apple, and a handful of other digital products are not blocked in China. Edit: for those downvoting me, Google literally shut down their China operations because they were unwilling to comply with censorship requirements. Conversely, Google and other US companies seem completely willing to comply with national security letters that compel them to spy on non-US persons, which should make other countries where US companies operate equally uneasy.
  • gkanai 2y ago
    > They are blocked because they don’t censor content. These platforms certainly do censor content. They have large teams globally that do just that.
    • solaarphunk 2y ago
      I agree, but they have clearly not met the standard for what China needs. I mean Zuck literally was jogging around Beijing 10 years ago trying to build goodwill to get in, and it was Google that made the decision to exit the market.
    • est 2y ago
      > They have large teams globally that do just that. You are spreading the misinformation. Google can't keep up with the censorship shit and gave up as stated in their official blog https://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-approach-to-china.html https://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-approach-to-chin... > a more open Internet outweighed our discomfort in agreeing to censor some results > We have decided we are no longer willing to continue censoring our results on Google.cn People seem to forget Google had a notorious record a terrible customer service. And China always demand more.
      • solaarphunk 2y ago
        Google did everything right in terms of local execution to get all the required licensure and top talent, and then Sergey threw it away.
        • seanmcdirmid 2y ago
          Both founders having grown up in communist block countries supposedly had something to do with their aversion. At least that’s what I heard (was working for MS china back then).
          • est 2y ago
            And the worst part of a Communism is "planned economy", e.g. the state decides which app/service is good or not.
            • seanmcdirmid 2y ago
              There was the PLA hacking gmail accounts in Hong Kong also, which supposedly was why Google stopped playing nice in the first place.
              • est 2y ago
                It's a rogue state after all.
            • wiseowise 2y ago
              Surely planned economy was the worst part and not repressions and millions dead under red boot.
              • est 2y ago
                the reason behind millions of death because the grain rationing system leaving little to none food for peasants in the 1960s, yeah it's still economical issue. Bad things happen when the state controls everything.
  • supriyo-biswas 2y ago
    "Doesn't censor content" is probably not describing the situation correctly; while some companies like Google have typically resisted such in the aughts, they regularly take requests from other countries of this sort, and it'd be very simple for them to reenter the China market by having a stance similar to what they have for other countries. The issue here is probably caused by the requirement for an ICP recordal which requires removal of violating user-generated content within 15 minutes, which is probably a very tight deadline, probably coupled with a strong false positive rate which is why said companies are also hesitant to introduce automation. It could also be argued that Tiktok is not completely value-aligned with US interests, although this has not been provably shown and whatever we have thus far is speculative.
    • est 2y ago
      > ICP recordal which requires removal of violating user-generated content And the reason behind that? Copy from other comments, "So China can't spy on Americans and astroturf propaganda", swap China/America
      • supriyo-biswas 2y ago
        > Copy from other comments, "So China can't spy on Americans and astroturf propaganda" The Chinese versions of these services are walled off from the rest of the world (otherwise the ICP license probably ends up applying to the worldwide service), so this is not even a plausible explanation. Further, asserting that the requirements imposed by the ICP recordal as being equivalent to following laws in other democracies is laughable; since most democracies make considerations towards good faith motives towards following a law even though there might be misses otherwise, not to mention the kind of content being censored.
        • est 2y ago
          this is why I don't like online political arguments, it always come down to faith and infidels
    • hiddencost 2y ago
• soheil 2y ago
  This is such a stupid argument. This is about censorship to American citizens and a conversation about losing their rights as an authoritarian state's victims.
  • itake 2y ago
    American citizens can use the multitude of copy cat apps for their freedom of speech. If it was about freedom of speech the gov would have requested all the apps to censor the topics, not banning one app.
    • gtsop 2y ago
      It is about freedom of speech, the freedom of China's speech within USA.
    • hmm37 2y ago
      Part of what constitutes freedom of speech is freedom to hear what someone has to state which is constitutionally protected. The fact that there might be other venues where someone can produce speech, does not mean that the right to hear what someone has to say has not been denied.
      • kelnos 2y ago
        Yes, it absolutely does mean that, in this case. Sure, if finding and joining another platform was a difficult thing, that would be a problem. If no other platforms will host your speech, that's a problem. If your audience is significantly reduced in size, then that's a problem. But none of that will be the case if TikTok is banned.
    • wiseowise 2y ago
      They don’t have enough bandwidth to compete with TikTok. There’s a network effect, like YouTube, iMessage, etc.
    • Cookingboy 2y ago
      >multitude of copy cat apps for their freedom of speech. Except they can't. All of the other apps are under U.S. government control and have engaged in severe censorship on certain topics such as the Israel-Gaza conflict. Even the politicians who voted for the bill have openly admitted that making Israel looking bad is the reason they are banning TikTok. This ban effort regained momentum after October 7th, 2023: https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/tiktok-ban-israel-gaza-palestine-hamas-account-creator-video-rcna122849 https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/tiktok-ban-israel-...
• brookst 2y ago
  So… if China mistreats their citizens, reciprocity says we must mistreat ours? You don’t fight censorship with censorship. That doesn’t stand up to even the most cursory thought. You fight censorship with openness. As soon as you find yourself arguing that you have no choice but to engage in the same behaviors you claim to dislike, you have literally become the enemy.
  • mavelikara 2y ago
    > You don’t fight censorship with censorship. That doesn’t stand up to even the most cursory thought. You fight censorship with openness. Can you explain this better without the assumption that it is self-evident?
    • brookst 2y ago
      Sure. If censorship is wrong, then it is wrong. If censorship is just fine, the n it is just fine. It is the height of hypocrisy to engage in censorship in the name of stamping out censorship. It feels like a tautology because the opposing viewpoint is a very simple hypocrisy. If you don’t like something, don’t do it.
      • RHSeeger 2y ago
        But, it's not really censorship, per se. It's "your company, which is of <this country> cannot do business in our country; because we want to give that a company in our country". And, in that light, doing the reverse (not allowing the company from that country to do business in ours) doesn't seem unreasonable. I'm not a fan of it, but I can understand the argument for it.
      • RandomThoughts3 2y ago
        It’s not a censorship issue. It’s about market access. This is a commercial dispute not a freedom of expression one. There is plenty of other platforms where you will still be able to say whatever you want.
        • 2y ago
• chvid 2y ago
  Yes. Plenty of Teslas on the street in China but no Chinese cars on the street in the US. Lets see what the next chapter is; as you said reciprocity is key ...
  • KoftaBob 2y ago
    If you want to use that analogy, a big reason Chinese cars aren't in the US is because the Chinese government heavily subsidizes their car production, which would lead to unfair price competition with other carmakers. If you want true reciprocity there, China would either need to stop subsidizing their carmakers, or the US would need to add heavy tariffs to their cars to level the playing field.
    • snapcaster 2y ago
      You realize the US bailed out their auto companies and heavily subsidize EVs right? it's like you're using "reciprocity" to mean US win China lose or something
• kome 2y ago
  so, you are telling me that democracy doesn't mean anything nowadays. you don't want to be better than china.
• throawayonthe 2y ago
  their barbarous censorship vs our blessed national security https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/our-blessed-homeland-their-barbarous-wastes https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/our-blessed-homeland-their-ba...
• renewiltord 2y ago
  If China develops a medical technique better than ours and ban ours, will we ban that technique here? We must do what is right for our nation. If TikTok harms us we must ban it, reciprocal or not. If it does not harm or does benefit us, we must not ban it, reciprocal or not. The question is only whether it harms or benefits our people.
• t0bia_s 2y ago
  "...there is now a widespread tendency to argue that one can only defend democracy by totalitarian methods. If one loves democracy, the argument runs, one must crush its enemies by no matter what means. And who are its enemies? It always appears that they are not only those who attack it openly and consciously, but those who ‘objectively’ endanger it by spreading mistaken doctrines. In other words, defending democracy involves destroying all independence of thought." Geroge Orwell - Proposed preface to Animal Farm, first published in the Times Literary Supplement on 15 September 1972 https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/the-freedom-of-the-press/ https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel...
• newsclues 2y ago
  Isn't fair trade the key?
• flkenosad 2y ago
  Man you're cutting off communication for 300 million people. These governments can shove it, they have no business censoring this many families. The government shouldn't have the right to backdoor every piece of software in the country. We've officially lost our collective minds here. I thought you Americans loved freedom of speech. Especially Elon. Or I suppose that was only marketting for his world takeover scheme. Huh
  • orf 2y ago
    Search for the “paradox of tolerance”. Nothing in this world is black and white.
• jl6 2y ago
  The better analogy is to when China wanted to block opium.
  • rchaud 2y ago
    The videos dividing America are being shot and filmed right here at home, and cross-posted to Twitter, Reddit, Facebook and Instagram. The better analogy would be disrupting the Taliban's opium supply routes, but allowing allied warlords to continue selling it freely to finance their operations.
• bamboozled 2y ago
  100%, we allow China to have a backdoor into our society but we don't have one into theirs.
• rchaud 2y ago
  Where does the law say anything about reciprocity? This is censorship under the guise of 'national security'. Facebook, Twitter and Instagram have done more to undermine American institutions and openly divide the population than anything the CCP could dream up.