6 ms·

I agree with everything you're saying, but I also can't fully square up that the equivalent American apps aren't allowed in China. This is about freedom of spee

by tims33 2y ago

I agree with everything you're saying, but I also can't fully square up that the equivalent American apps aren't allowed in China. This is about freedom of speech on app built by a country that has no freedom of speech. I realize this point is orthogonal, but is still an important element of the decision.

marricks 2y ago
> also can't fully square up that the equivalent American apps aren't allowed in China It's a chance to showcase how we're "more free" or literally just as restrictive
- talldayo 2y ago
  The United States used to claim we had a laissez-faire market. We don't claim that anymore.
  - tgma 2y ago
    In founding of the United States lies tariff stories. The United States does not reject government and nations as entities at all. It just asserts rights for its citizens which doesn't include everyone on the planet.
- CryptoBanker 2y ago
  Or it’s a chance to be “fair”
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- Retric 2y ago
  At its core free speech is about the freedom from government influence and the complaint is about government influence. It’s one thing to allow the CCP to say whatever it wants, it’s something else to allow them the ability to manipulate of what other people can say. Allowing such a highly restricted platform seems like it hurts free speech more than it helps.
  - logicchains 2y ago
    It's not a highly restricted platform at all, there were literally videos of translated Hitler speeches trending with hundreds of thousands of likes, even though the CCP absolutely hates western nationalism.
    - Retric 2y ago
      Restrictions become more effective when they are less obvious. When as has been demonstrated their algorithm ignores the number of upvotes in favor of massively promoting viewpoints it cares about, that’s also vast suppression of opposing viewpoints but in a way o get creators to quietly comply rather than try and push the boundaries.
    - philipov 2y ago
      China probably doesn't care about Hitler. How about Tiananmen Square? Do you see a lot of trending coverage on Hong Kong protests?
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - robgibbons 2y ago
      This is the platform that led to the proliferation of newspeak terms like "unalive" to circumvent content restrictions. Such speech restrictions were never a thing on FB, IG, X, or YT, yet this form of self-censorship has spread to those platforms anyway, because TikTok users have become so used to it.
      - Timon3 2y ago
        While there aren't direct speech restrictions in platforms like YouTube, you're leaving out the crucial detail that mentioning words like "suicide" gets your video demonetized, which directly causes similar self-censorship.
        Retric 2y ago
- roca 2y ago
  With or without Tiktok, the USA is nowhere near as restrictive as the CCP. The users who tried RedNote discovered that very quickly.
  - VectorLock 2y ago
    People trying to act like this Chinese controlled vehicle supports free speech is so weird to me. They're not "censoring" anything - they're using it as a straight unimpeded funnel to subvert the west.
    - vkou 2y ago
      > they're using it as a straight unimpeded funnel to subvert the west. And Fox News is also a foreign-owned straight unimpeded funnel used to subvert democracy, which sows division and conflict in our society. It's done orders of magnitude more harm to it than TikTok ever has. When are we banning it?
      - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
        Rupert Murdoch got US citizenship because of foreign ownership rules. From his wiki page: > On 4 September 1985, Murdoch became a naturalized citizen to satisfy the legal requirement that only US citizens were permitted to own US television stations.
        vkou 2y ago
        I am pretty sure a Chinese-American owner would be considered Chinese for the conversation about foreign control over TikTok.
        seanmcdirmid 2y ago
        China doesn’t allow for or recognize dual citizenship, so it doesn’t matter unless they also gave up their Chinese citizenship (rumor has it the CPC relaxed this rule for a certain snowboarder). But ya, that Murdoch is also Australian is probably benign.
- infecto 2y ago
  The US does not need to showcase anything, they are magnitudes more free in speech than mainland China. To suggest otherwise is strange.
- moussess 2y ago
  Here is a list on what restrictions Chinese citizens live with - Workers in state sectors can be banned from traveling out of China https://www.scmp.com/news/article/3265503/chinas-expanding-travel-curbs-are-cutting-more-state-workers-rest-world https://www.scmp.com/news/article/3265503/chinas-expanding-t.... Also, non 1st tier city citizens can have a hard time getting passports, essentially a ban of travelling - banned from using trains or airline if they are on the social credit score ban - banned from moving money out of China for more than $50k a year - banned from accessing foreign websites. VPN is technically illegal, and using it can get you into trouble - banned from accessing porn - banned from using a long list of restricted words on social media, from Winnie the Pooh, to "support Xinjiang people" - banned from using TikTok - banned from protesting against lost wages from state enterprises - banned from group protesting the list goes on and on and on
  - marricks 2y ago
    Ok, that’s their country what does it have to do with us? Also why do we do this: > https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/10/24/shadowbanning-are-social-media-giants-censoring-pro-palestine-voices https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/10/24/shadowbanning-... This is why it’s good to have a social media company free of US control.
    - talldayo 2y ago
      > Ok, that’s their country what does it have to do with us? I mean, nothing really. You could say the same about Israel and Palestine, or Saudi Arabia and Iran, or China and Hong Kong. Human rights abuses are perfectly acceptable in today's society, as long as they're out of sight and out of mind. He who controls visibility into human suffering controls the way people perceive his control. Hasbara, in Israeli vernacular. > Also why do we do this: Because Zionist lobbying exerts disproportionate control over both the US tech industry and the legislative apparatus regulating it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-BDS_laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-BDS_laws You're not going to drive a wedge between people by repeating the Israel stance, though. If you tried to expose China's same abuses for working slave labor to death or suicide, you'd be suppressed in exactly the same way America suppresses your anti-Israel content. From a national security perspective, TikTok's existence is about whether another country can impose their own double-standard on top of America's own populist opinion. Today it's the war in Gaza, but tomorrow it will be about suppressing democracy in Taiwan for the "betterment of global peace" et. al. You can't deny China's plans to use TikTok for war with a straight face - by many accounts it's already started.
- mvc 2y ago
  What defence remains against an autocratic government who will use that very freedom as an attack vector for their nefarious goals.
Cyph0n 2y ago
If stooping down to their level is the move we make, then we should immediately stop acting as if we are more “free” or democratic than China. You can’t have it both ways.
- tims33 2y ago
  Is allowing them to impose the same kind of restrictions in their US app as they do for their own citizens good for free speech?
- talldayo 2y ago
  > then we should immediately stop acting as if we are more “free” or democratic than China. This is a histrionic response. America can still be more free and democratic than China while also enforcing a ban on their businesses.
  - Cyph0n 2y ago
    Blanket censorship of this kind is not the hallmark of a healthy democracy. This ban is the definition of a slippery slope - this ban may be in your interests, but eventually one will not. What then?
    - talldayo 2y ago
      This isn't blanket censorship, period. Every single user that currently voices their stance, values or opinions can continue to do the exact same thing on any other platform they choose. Just not TikTok, because they are a business owned by an adversarial government that deliberately uses their soapbox to manipulate democratic audiences: https://kyivinsider.com/russia-and-china-just-rigged-romanian-elections-using-10-million-fake-tiktok-accounts/ https://kyivinsider.com/russia-and-china-just-rigged-romania... Also don't forget - TikTok has remediation options where they continue to operate in America as an American business instead. They are the ones that refused that and chose censorship. America just forced the choice between eating the cake and having it. Edit: Correct, it is not. The part that is censorship on China's behalf is the enforcement of the Great Firewall and enaction of laws prohibiting citizens from owning or consuming foreign news or entertainment. China's ban on foreign apps could just as well be explained by a desire for better domestic software markets - the same cannot be said for the Firewall. Edit 2: Yes, secession would settle this. China has proven that they cannot be trusted to disseminate information through a state-owned apparatus. If the owner continues to be a government entity, then continuing to let them do "business" is like letting the Trojans wheel in their horse so the citizens can marvel at it.
robterrell 2y ago
This is an incredible point. Instead of using this crisis to pressure Beijing to crack open the China market to US companies or even just get some concessions, Trump just folded to look like a champ.

by tims33 2y ago

marricks 2y ago

> also can't fully square up that the equivalent American apps aren't allowed in China It's a chance to showcase how we're "more free" or literally just as restrictive

talldayo 2y ago
The United States used to claim we had a laissez-faire market. We don't claim that anymore.
- tgma 2y ago
  In founding of the United States lies tariff stories. The United States does not reject government and nations as entities at all. It just asserts rights for its citizens which doesn't include everyone on the planet.
CryptoBanker 2y ago
Or it’s a chance to be “fair”
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
Retric 2y ago
At its core free speech is about the freedom from government influence and the complaint is about government influence. It’s one thing to allow the CCP to say whatever it wants, it’s something else to allow them the ability to manipulate of what other people can say. Allowing such a highly restricted platform seems like it hurts free speech more than it helps.
- logicchains 2y ago
  It's not a highly restricted platform at all, there were literally videos of translated Hitler speeches trending with hundreds of thousands of likes, even though the CCP absolutely hates western nationalism.
  - Retric 2y ago
    Restrictions become more effective when they are less obvious. When as has been demonstrated their algorithm ignores the number of upvotes in favor of massively promoting viewpoints it cares about, that’s also vast suppression of opposing viewpoints but in a way o get creators to quietly comply rather than try and push the boundaries.
  - philipov 2y ago
    China probably doesn't care about Hitler. How about Tiananmen Square? Do you see a lot of trending coverage on Hong Kong protests?
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - robgibbons 2y ago
    This is the platform that led to the proliferation of newspeak terms like "unalive" to circumvent content restrictions. Such speech restrictions were never a thing on FB, IG, X, or YT, yet this form of self-censorship has spread to those platforms anyway, because TikTok users have become so used to it.
    - Timon3 2y ago
      While there aren't direct speech restrictions in platforms like YouTube, you're leaving out the crucial detail that mentioning words like "suicide" gets your video demonetized, which directly causes similar self-censorship.
      - Retric 2y ago
roca 2y ago
With or without Tiktok, the USA is nowhere near as restrictive as the CCP. The users who tried RedNote discovered that very quickly.
- VectorLock 2y ago
  People trying to act like this Chinese controlled vehicle supports free speech is so weird to me. They're not "censoring" anything - they're using it as a straight unimpeded funnel to subvert the west.
  - vkou 2y ago
    > they're using it as a straight unimpeded funnel to subvert the west. And Fox News is also a foreign-owned straight unimpeded funnel used to subvert democracy, which sows division and conflict in our society. It's done orders of magnitude more harm to it than TikTok ever has. When are we banning it?
    - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
      Rupert Murdoch got US citizenship because of foreign ownership rules. From his wiki page: > On 4 September 1985, Murdoch became a naturalized citizen to satisfy the legal requirement that only US citizens were permitted to own US television stations.
      - vkou 2y ago
        I am pretty sure a Chinese-American owner would be considered Chinese for the conversation about foreign control over TikTok.
        seanmcdirmid 2y ago
        China doesn’t allow for or recognize dual citizenship, so it doesn’t matter unless they also gave up their Chinese citizenship (rumor has it the CPC relaxed this rule for a certain snowboarder). But ya, that Murdoch is also Australian is probably benign.
infecto 2y ago
The US does not need to showcase anything, they are magnitudes more free in speech than mainland China. To suggest otherwise is strange.
moussess 2y ago
Here is a list on what restrictions Chinese citizens live with - Workers in state sectors can be banned from traveling out of China https://www.scmp.com/news/article/3265503/chinas-expanding-travel-curbs-are-cutting-more-state-workers-rest-world https://www.scmp.com/news/article/3265503/chinas-expanding-t.... Also, non 1st tier city citizens can have a hard time getting passports, essentially a ban of travelling - banned from using trains or airline if they are on the social credit score ban - banned from moving money out of China for more than $50k a year - banned from accessing foreign websites. VPN is technically illegal, and using it can get you into trouble - banned from accessing porn - banned from using a long list of restricted words on social media, from Winnie the Pooh, to "support Xinjiang people" - banned from using TikTok - banned from protesting against lost wages from state enterprises - banned from group protesting the list goes on and on and on
- marricks 2y ago
  Ok, that’s their country what does it have to do with us? Also why do we do this: > https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/10/24/shadowbanning-are-social-media-giants-censoring-pro-palestine-voices https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/10/24/shadowbanning-... This is why it’s good to have a social media company free of US control.
  - talldayo 2y ago
    > Ok, that’s their country what does it have to do with us? I mean, nothing really. You could say the same about Israel and Palestine, or Saudi Arabia and Iran, or China and Hong Kong. Human rights abuses are perfectly acceptable in today's society, as long as they're out of sight and out of mind. He who controls visibility into human suffering controls the way people perceive his control. Hasbara, in Israeli vernacular. > Also why do we do this: Because Zionist lobbying exerts disproportionate control over both the US tech industry and the legislative apparatus regulating it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-BDS_laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-BDS_laws You're not going to drive a wedge between people by repeating the Israel stance, though. If you tried to expose China's same abuses for working slave labor to death or suicide, you'd be suppressed in exactly the same way America suppresses your anti-Israel content. From a national security perspective, TikTok's existence is about whether another country can impose their own double-standard on top of America's own populist opinion. Today it's the war in Gaza, but tomorrow it will be about suppressing democracy in Taiwan for the "betterment of global peace" et. al. You can't deny China's plans to use TikTok for war with a straight face - by many accounts it's already started.
mvc 2y ago
What defence remains against an autocratic government who will use that very freedom as an attack vector for their nefarious goals.

Cyph0n 2y ago

If stooping down to their level is the move we make, then we should immediately stop acting as if we are more “free” or democratic than China. You can’t have it both ways.

tims33 2y ago
Is allowing them to impose the same kind of restrictions in their US app as they do for their own citizens good for free speech?
talldayo 2y ago
> then we should immediately stop acting as if we are more “free” or democratic than China. This is a histrionic response. America can still be more free and democratic than China while also enforcing a ban on their businesses.
- Cyph0n 2y ago
  Blanket censorship of this kind is not the hallmark of a healthy democracy. This ban is the definition of a slippery slope - this ban may be in your interests, but eventually one will not. What then?
  - talldayo 2y ago
    This isn't blanket censorship, period. Every single user that currently voices their stance, values or opinions can continue to do the exact same thing on any other platform they choose. Just not TikTok, because they are a business owned by an adversarial government that deliberately uses their soapbox to manipulate democratic audiences: https://kyivinsider.com/russia-and-china-just-rigged-romanian-elections-using-10-million-fake-tiktok-accounts/ https://kyivinsider.com/russia-and-china-just-rigged-romania... Also don't forget - TikTok has remediation options where they continue to operate in America as an American business instead. They are the ones that refused that and chose censorship. America just forced the choice between eating the cake and having it. Edit: Correct, it is not. The part that is censorship on China's behalf is the enforcement of the Great Firewall and enaction of laws prohibiting citizens from owning or consuming foreign news or entertainment. China's ban on foreign apps could just as well be explained by a desire for better domestic software markets - the same cannot be said for the Firewall. Edit 2: Yes, secession would settle this. China has proven that they cannot be trusted to disseminate information through a state-owned apparatus. If the owner continues to be a government entity, then continuing to let them do "business" is like letting the Trojans wheel in their horse so the citizens can marvel at it.

robterrell 2y ago

This is an incredible point. Instead of using this crisis to pressure Beijing to crack open the China market to US companies or even just get some concessions, Trump just folded to look like a champ.