This bill is a terrible idea, but it's worth mentioning > yeah TikTok ban was a very bad precedent The TikTok ban didn't set a precedent, it's following a gen

This bill is a terrible idea, but it's worth mentioning > yeah TikTok ban was a very bad precedent The TikTok ban didn't set a precedent, it's following a general precedent. The most obvious precedent is Grindr [0]. What makes TikTok unusual is they refused to sell. The precedent is also very old. There are usually laws regarding doing business with enemies during wartime, for example. That's the same basic idea: restriction on business/trade due to national security issues. The ones everyone knows about are US car companies and IBMs doing business with the Nazis. Typically, AFAIK, companies are required to divest to a subsidiary, which is what the US wanted ByteDance to do. At least that's the right conceptual framing IMO, whether or not you think the ban was a bad idea. CISA considers China the "most active and persistent cyber threat to the U.S. Government, private sector, and critical infrastructure networks" [1]. So while the US isn't technically in a cyber war with China, they basically are. [0] https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/6/21168079/grindr-sold-chinese-owner-us-cfius-security-concerns-kunlun-lgbtq https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/6/21168079/grindr-sold-chine... [1] https://www.cisa.gov/topics/cyber-threats-and-advisories/nation-state-cyber-actors/china https://www.cisa.gov/topics/cyber-threats-and-advisories/nat...