3 ms·

Would love to see parity in these sorts of trade restrictions between the US and China. Me personally, then I'd have zero problems with TikTok being PRC-owned.

Would love to see parity in these sorts of trade restrictions between the US and China. Me personally, then I'd have zero problems with TikTok being PRC-owned. As it stands, foreign businesses operating in China are much more constrained, and laws they must comply with are enormously more invasive (e.g. censorship) than going the other way.

kyrra 2y ago
For those that disagree with the above: Reciprocity is an important part of trade. China is making these choices, and the US is just putting things on a level playing field.
that_guy_iain 2y ago
Those laws also apply to Chinese companies operating in China too. They have different stuff for outside of China. For example, TikTok's algorithm which is the general use one is AFAIK banned in China.
- TulliusCicero 2y ago
  Correct, TikTok itself is banned in China, which makes the complaints about it being banned in the US even more hilarious.
whimsicalism 2y ago
i think this is a fun tack but personally i should be allowed to read and watch whatever i want even if China is a bad actor
- TulliusCicero 2y ago
  Trade has been within the purview of the government, every government really, to regulate since basically forever. It's not a content-based restriction, and yeah, trade wars can kinda suck, even for end consumers, no denying that.
  - whimsicalism 2y ago
    no, it’s a content and editorial restriction. it is not merely trade.
    - TulliusCicero 2y ago
      No, it's not. There's no opinions on TikTok videos that would be legislatively banned by the US on other platforms. If you do have examples of those kinds of speech restrictions, by all means, provide examples.
      - whimsicalism 2y ago
        the use of bytedance’s algorithm is an editorial decision that is being banned
        TulliusCicero 2y ago
        And yet the exact same algorithm used by a platform owned by another country would not be banned. Thus, it is not actually content-based.
halJordan 2y ago
That's the opposite of a principled stand (cicero is rolling in his grave over your use of his name to say this). It was, and is, boo hoo so terrible when the prc forces American companies to engage in forced sales, hand over the crown jewel IPs to local partners and "request" 50% ownership for the govt.
- TulliusCicero 2y ago
  > It was, and is, boo hoo so terrible when the prc forces American companies to engage in forced sales Reciprocity is a standard part of trade. If you come down on foreign businesses in your country, don't be surprised when the same thing happens to your businesses in other countries. When Trump threatens tariffs, other countries threaten to respond in kind. That's how trade basically always works. There's a reason why free trade deals focus on reducing restrictions going both ways.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

kyrra 2y ago

For those that disagree with the above: Reciprocity is an important part of trade. China is making these choices, and the US is just putting things on a level playing field.

that_guy_iain 2y ago

Those laws also apply to Chinese companies operating in China too. They have different stuff for outside of China. For example, TikTok's algorithm which is the general use one is AFAIK banned in China.

TulliusCicero 2y ago
Correct, TikTok itself is banned in China, which makes the complaints about it being banned in the US even more hilarious.

whimsicalism 2y ago

i think this is a fun tack but personally i should be allowed to read and watch whatever i want even if China is a bad actor

TulliusCicero 2y ago
Trade has been within the purview of the government, every government really, to regulate since basically forever. It's not a content-based restriction, and yeah, trade wars can kinda suck, even for end consumers, no denying that.
- whimsicalism 2y ago
  no, it’s a content and editorial restriction. it is not merely trade.
  - TulliusCicero 2y ago
    No, it's not. There's no opinions on TikTok videos that would be legislatively banned by the US on other platforms. If you do have examples of those kinds of speech restrictions, by all means, provide examples.
    - whimsicalism 2y ago
      the use of bytedance’s algorithm is an editorial decision that is being banned
      - TulliusCicero 2y ago
        And yet the exact same algorithm used by a platform owned by another country would not be banned. Thus, it is not actually content-based.

halJordan 2y ago

That's the opposite of a principled stand (cicero is rolling in his grave over your use of his name to say this). It was, and is, boo hoo so terrible when the prc forces American companies to engage in forced sales, hand over the crown jewel IPs to local partners and "request" 50% ownership for the govt.

TulliusCicero 2y ago
> It was, and is, boo hoo so terrible when the prc forces American companies to engage in forced sales Reciprocity is a standard part of trade. If you come down on foreign businesses in your country, don't be surprised when the same thing happens to your businesses in other countries. When Trump threatens tariffs, other countries threaten to respond in kind. That's how trade basically always works. There's a reason why free trade deals focus on reducing restrictions going both ways.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]