TikTok is taking the US government to court.
You must log in or # to comment.
Every negative thing about Tiktok is also true about Instagram and Twitter.
TikTok is solely responsible for that AI voice. Instagram and Twitter have never done anything that compares to the pain and suffering that has caused to humanity.
M A R C U S P U M P K I N
I’m basically indifferent to Instagram (IDK what it’s about) and I’ve hated Twitter since I first learned about its high concept. Twitter makes people stupid.
Except the most relevant part: it is owned by a hostile foreign government.
To be fair, so is League of Legends and every product made by Tencent and their subsidiaries. If they’re going to go ahead with a ban, they should at least keep it consistent.
The real question you are asking is whether inaction is worse than inconsistency. Should we not put out a fire unless we can put out all fires? What you are suggesting is to let something burn for the sake of consistency.
I want to avoid “everyone has free speech, but some have more free speech than others” from becoming precedent.
Except the part about the authoritarian regime, the US has many problems but it’s still a democracy.
Edit: I’m glad you downvote me because you never had to learn what living in a dictatorship is like, I didn’t, but my parents generation still did and I can tell you it looks nothing like the US of today. Women were only allowed to be housewives, groups of more than 2 people couldn’t talk openly in the street because that can lead to dangerous ideas spreading out, you would have to be careful what you said even at home because your neighbour could be listening to sell you out, all pieces of art and media would go through an government office to get censored, and so on, so yes, I stand with what I said, the US is a free democratic country even if you have been spoiled enough to think it is not.
It’s not a democracy to me.
Y’know Orwell wrote about how warping definitions was a tool of authoritarianism. Typical ML behavior, tbh.
The United States is a democracy only if oligarchies are democracies
the US has many problems but it’s still a democracy.
LMAO
I feel like you only think a country is a democracy if it says it’s a people’s republic while it commits genocide.
Not everything that’s not a dictatorship is a democracy. You’re using a strawman to argue your point.
A democracy stops when there is a severe imbalance in influence on legislation between voters and lobbyists / corporations / or voters depending on income / colour of skin.
There’s also a quasi oligarchy with freedom of speech, that’s about where western Europe is at. In the US, by now, a large part of the population has been deprived of basic human rights, as shown in unpunished police brutality and murders, and vigilante killings of people for their beliefs, opinions or identity.
Neither still qualifies for democracy. We would have to unite about two thirds of the voters behind a new party to even hope to change anything that matters (hello climate change), and that’s assuming that a hypothetical party that would actually act in the interest of restoring democratic mechanisms would be persecuted or otherwise hindered by authorities.
Hey I was born in a country with a military dictatorship and my parents grew up under it.
That’s exactly why I believe in freedom and liberty. Freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom of association. We need to uphold these principles so that the US doesn’t slowly slip into authoritarianism like most democracies tend to do over the long term.
That’s exactly why I oppose this TikTok ban with every fiber of my being. If a citizen wants to communicate on a Chinese platform, he has every right to do so under our laws. He can make the executive decision for himself about the potential risks or benefits.
That’s what it means to live in a free society. You are advocating for authoritarianism while you rail against authoritarianism. Reminds me of 1984. War is peace, right?
He can make the executive decision for himself about the potential risks or benefits
But should he? Is any one by themselves really capable? Note that I don’t really know what to think myself, purely asking.
the US has many problems but it’s still a democracy
Given the choice between hot shit and cold shit still ends with you being covered in shit. Heads or tails between two very similar parties hardly counts as a true democracy.
While the US might be hot shit, it’s still our OWN shit. Keep your cold shit on your side of the pond.
I’m not an American. By your logic, let’s ban all American social media.
let’s ban all American social media.
That would be great. Where can I sign?
Just wondering why would you want to ban anything? Does banning something solve any problem that a normal person has? I mean if the ban wave is on it would be fair to ban anything that’s not open source but I do think censorship is cancer.
I am not very comfortable with “banning” websites - let’s say outright dissolving some companies is probably the better approach, but also a double-edged sword. However, there is sometimes a need to legally shut down some entities.
I believe that by now it should no longer be a subject of debate that social media has a very unhealthy influence on the public opinion, and that most humans do not have the intellectual capacity to critically reflect on the media they consume. That’s already a problem with some TV programs, and it has gotten worse with social media monetizing anger. As a result we get people who vote for politicians who promise them nothing short of a dictatorship. That’s incredibly dangerous, and therefore I would like to see all social media federated - centralized services give way too much power to individuals with shady motives.
TikTok is a psyops software disguised as a social media application. Facebook is bad for other reasons. But psysops are not one of them.
Facebook is bad for other reasons. But psysops are not one of them.
You’ve obviously never heard of the Cambridge Analytica scandal. That meddled in our presidential election on behalf of a hostile foreign nation.
There are also plenty of other examples of Facebook running psyop campaigns themselves on their own users. Your claim is demonstrably false.
Facebook complies with the Cloud Act.
lol I’m not british
And What does that have to do with anything? We aren’t dealing with China, we’re dealing with a corporation.
The fact that the company that manages TikTok is insisting on maintaining the power structure that allows for influence by the CCP makes that claim incredibly suspicious.
Oh no, should we ban Facebook because the US government can subpoena them for information!?!
First, that’s materially different. Second, yes; I think Facebook giving the government our information without a fight is bad. What, did you think I would suddenly think the dissolution of our privacy was good because it was an American company?
Oh that’s different than when the Chinese government serves a subpoena?
when the Chinese government serves a subpoena
Doesn’t really matter unless you live under it. Instagram and Twitter or more dangerous to U.S. citizens.
Care to expand on that
China can’t arrest people in the U.S. The U.S. and state governments can.
Which country is this?
TikTok blocks all access from Hong Kong. Can I sue them?
Not as a foreign national.
Wait, I’m in HK right now for business and can open it just fine from my hotel wifi. The website that is, I don’t care about the platform and wouldn’t use the app.
I could play videos just fine without login though. Anything I’m missing?
Really? It just redirects me to https://www.tiktok.com/hk/notfound
Removed by mod
Good. The ban is censorship dressed up as national security.
TikTok is state sponsored spyware dressed up as fUnNy ViDeOs
And Facebook isn’t?
Shit I forgot the us government owns 50% of Facebook
Access to the data it’s what matters, ownership is just one method of access.
If this were true, it wouldn’t matter that the US set up the social security number system, because Experian leaked millions of Americans’ SSNs.
It obviously matters who owns a service that millions of citizens use from a country that is a political rival. You’re just hoping to shut down any conversation against TikTok with a whataboutism
We’re talking about individuals’ personal data stored by social media companies being accessible to others (governments, in this case). This has nothing to do with social security.
The problem is that the data is accessable, but that’s not being addressed. This is an improper fix to an actual problem, just facts.
When signing up for a tik-tok account, I put in a birth date, a username, an email address for verifcation and that was it. I didn’t need to provide a drivers license, verify that the name I put in was my actual name, that the birth date was my actual birth date. Location isn’t allowed nor was it requested and neither was Nearby devices. It’s actually been a much better behaved application than any American social media app.
Removed by mod
They don’t need to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act
Requires a warrant or subpoena. That is the difference.
Also requires the company to be US-based, so doesn’t apply here. Well, not yet, that’s the whole point of forcing them to sell or be banned.
They don’t need to. Facebook plays ball.
“if one authoritarian government does surveillance even across borders, why can’t all? Anything less than ‘i agree’ here is hypocrisy!”
Noone is saying that. The argument is pretty much that people want more scrutiny applied to other companies beyond tiktok, and ideally not be under constant surveillance by any of them, not that people want to be monitored by all police states equally.
It’s a whataboutist cop out. People who like tiktok just wanna point out how supposedly since tiktok was targeted, then it’s all in bad faith and therefore there could never possibly be a legit concern with tiktok in particular. Any argument to be addressed with “ChInA bAd”
It doesn’t matter who owns it. It’s the data that the US government is accessing.
I couldn’t give a shit about TikTok, I’ve never used it in my life. I just think the US should be open and say we are banning this as we don’t have control over it. Sure China is only doing what we are doing but fuck em. I’d respect that.
Also, it’s got to be about silencing pro-Palestinian rhetoric too.
If they ban TikTok they should ban FaceBook and Instagram too.
Also, it’s got to be about silencing pro-Palestinian rhetoric too.
Yeah trump was talking about banning it in 2020 because he used his time machine to find out what it would be used for in the future. After his harrowing story from the future, I agreed with the effort to ban it because I lOvE gEnOcIdE
…of fucking course it matters who owns it
I refuse to converse with someone who conveys themselves in this manner.
Be better dude. Manners cost nothing.
Have a wonderful day!
Whataboutism isn’t the elevated level of discourse you’re pretending it to be
You’re actually just mad you don’t have an actual response to the fact that you making the about Israel/Palestine makes zero sense
I have a question for you. What is the difference between Google being banned in China and Tik Tok being banned in the US?
There really isn’t, but perhaps they should be honest about that.
Also, is Google banned or Google won’t do what China wants so left? I don’t know the answer.
*crickets chirping*
Mans gotta sleep bro. Christ. I’ll reply after work.
So is Instagram
Can I ban NSA from spying on me? I’m not even on fReEeDoOoOoM land, I should be entitled to some amount of privacy
Whatabout! Whatabout!
This is not whataboutism - it’s looking at the bigger picture. The point is that you should want to prevent all mass surveillance by social media companies. Not force them to sell so that the government can get its greedy paws on the data.
The government can already access the data with a warrant. The ownership of TikTok has literally 0 effect on the government’s ability to access user data. Not being owned by the Chinese government has a huge impact on China’s ability to access that data.
I can want both.
And if someone chooses to watch that, that’s their business. Not nanny government’s. Not saying I do. But none of us have any business telling someone else what they can and cannot watch. That’s part of living in a supposedly “free” country. We aren’t China. You want a “great firewall”, then move there.
In our zeal to shun everything China-related, we must not become them.
The really secret is that the government is jealous of China
Removed by mod
Yes I need my government to tell me obvious facts like foreign surveillance is bad. I’m just that stupid /s
Which is any different than YouTube, Lemmy or anything else?
I think people should have a right to shoot themselves in the foot if they choose.
The difference from the perspective of the US is that it’s spyware from a potentially malicious foreign state. China bans US tech companies as well, TikTok took advantage of the US having a much more open market and the state decided that they were acting in bad faith.
I no longer opt into conversations with people who believe “China bad” is an argument winner
I thought the worst censorship is on facebook… then i started using tiktok…
What would give them standing? They’d have to be an entity protected by the constitution to claim that protection was harmed. Is it this (Wikipedia)?
TikTok Ltd was incorporated in the Cayman Islands and is based in both Singapore and Los Angeles. source
I guess I’ve never thought about what makes an entity have rights here. Buckingham Palace couldn’t just open shop here and start suing our government, right?
The case is essentially “hey you kinda passed a bill that’s against your own constitution? You’re kinda supposed to follow that…”
Does the US constitution apply for rights of businesses, or is it just people?
Not being snarky I actually don’t know
Corporations are people. Thanks to Citizens United. Though I’d gladly give up TikTok for the court to reverse this decision.
Important rights of businesses in the US constitution include
Important note regarding a business’s right to regulate free speech: The rules of the Constitution are meant to regulate Congress, not businesses or citizens. Therefore, the right to free speech means Congress cannot restrict someone from speaking his or her mind, but a business may be able to.
For example, a radio show has the right to not allow a certain person to speak on its program or to say certain things. Ultimately, such issues are decided by the Supreme Court, and there may be some exceptions, depending on the circumstances.
The constitution applies to the government, not the American (or other) people. “Government shall pass no law…”
List of companies incorporated in the Cayman Islands: https://capedge.com/company/by/incState/E9/active/true?sort=latestQuote.marketCap
Mostly obscure to me, but I looked up GlobalFoundries. Originally divested from AMD, bought IBM’s chip business, got a contract from US Department of Defense in 2023 for manufacturing military chips
I imagine you wouldn’t object to GlobalFoundries suing the US government
Of course, corporations are people and this is bigotry. Check mate.
We decided a while ago that the Constitution protects everyone and every thing in the US because the loophole of declaring people and companies to not be protected was too dystopian even for conservatives at the time.
grabs popcorn
as expected, they literally said they would pusue legal options before pulling out of the us.
Why can’t a country choose which services it wants to prohibit? Seems strange, it isn’t an American company.
I don’t really care, just wondering.
In the U.S., laws that disadvantage specific entities are generally considered to not be following the “equal protection” part of the (amended) constitution.
Countries without (their own) laws prohibiting it can (and do) prohibit specific services.
Member states of the WTO (like the U.S.) have agreed to allow themselves to be sued for lost profits based on any (new) laws they pass.
But, I’m no expert – this is just the view from my (potentially misinformed) corner of the world.
i don’t want foreign companies meddling with my country either, but here we are
At this point, I’d like to ask: If a foreign company threatens democracy in a country, is it legal for the executive to ban business with that company?
No? Then that doesn’t make sense. It’s a FOREIGN company, the government should have the right to do whatever it needs to protect its citizens in that regard.
This is the real question. Is there a loophole that allows foreign governments to freely exercise mass surveillance and psyops if they allow US citizens to post on a blackboard outside their offices?
If tiktok were a serious threat, the executive branch would have already banned it by now via an executive order.
That’s not what happend, instead a whole bill went through congress and got passed with the explanation being “foreign influence” as if American social media platforms don’t already do the same thing
This is more about removing foreign competition and not about saving democracy or ensuring security.
DoD already banned it 4 years ago for military because of the actual security threat of data collection.
TikTok pushed a notifications to all US users with the phone numbers of their local congressmen to oppose the bill. So many calls came in that the phone lines were jammed.
Let me distill that for you: China attempted to directly influence legislation with a mass propaganda campaign targeted at its US user base.
Please explain to me why that isn’t a threat and why the US should allow hostile foreign powers to directly influence internal politics?
We’ve already established that Tiktok Tok is not the CCP. That’s what the whole first “gonna ban TikTok” fiasco was over. It’s why they don’t store US data in China but continue to do business in the US.
That would be a business using the 1st amendment right (which everyone gets, not just citizens) to free speech to use it’s platform to ask it’s users to do something directly beneficial to them. Nothing illegal about it unless you want to reevaluate that “TikTok is the CCP” claim again.
The government certainly does have the right to protect citizens and make whatever laws are necessary. In this case, the government can do so by amending the constitution. Until then, the 1st Amendment applies to all citizens, non-citizens, and business entities operating in the United States.
When does a company care about the constitution? When it’s profits are threatened and the constitution suits their argument.
Down with vertical videos, down with short form content!
PS, China already bought all your personal data from Facebook.
I do not care.
Well, you do care enough to feel the need to let everyone know your opinion on the subject.
Oh shut the fuck up. Can we please not devolve every online argument into circular “well you cared enough to post this” bullshit? It’s exhausting.
The ironic thing is that if the US government wanted people to stop using it because of the PRC, they should have just leaked some fake Snowden style documents saying that the NSA was using it. Everyone would drop it like a hot potato then.
No they wouldn’t. “I don’t care, I’ve got nothing to hide”
Not a fan of tiktok content but I do see that it was banned obviously for censorship. A good move.
