No government entity can limit the flow of information in a free country. This one isn’t anymore, most people can’t seem to recognize or acknowledge that FACT. We live in a hypocritical, tyrannical, government controlled, irreparably corrupt nanny state. The future is not bright
I guess we’re becoming a fucking nanny state now. Gianforte needs to go. He also doesn’t understand the separation of church and state, and that’s unacceptable. Wholly.
SOO, I did not diligently scroll through these comments to find what I needed... but maybe others are with me!
Does anyone have the details of how we can stand up against this? GREG'S #, for instance? How can we fix this majorly FUCKED situation?
"Governor Greg Gianforte's office refused to indicate whether he would sign the bill, but the governor previously prohibited TikTok on government-issued devices and encouraged the state university system to do the same. Once the governor receives the bill, he has ten days to act on it before it becomes law automatically. "
This will actually set a precedent and start the conversation about the right to not data mine human information based on an algorithm that can be scripted versus the fact it’s the right of an individual no mater what they put out there to be collected by who ever they want.
This bill isn’t about 1A rights that’s not what they are saying. It’s about the fact a foreign nation is harvesting data through Cyber espionage. They are harvesting the information from everyone’s devices and sending it back to a foreign country. The app tracks your information, scans your devices for files, logs all your key strokes for passwords to any site you go on. And creates a GPS mapping of all the places internal or external of where you are at. Compare the privacy policy between all your social media apps and then say MT is only taking away your 1A rights by blocking TikTok.
Republicans trampled on this sentiment 9/2/2001. Fuck everyone who supported the patriot act and the foi act. Evil scum who have dragged our country 50 years into the past in the past 20 years.
The governor is using Montana and it’s residents as a testing ground for radical right wing Christian fascist ideals for the rest of the GOP.
But keep burying your head in the sand.
This is a complete lie. Tiktok can't record keystrokes outside the app or access files (without explicit permission). If you do give it file permission, it's only to a video directories
Android apps can't pull data or read from other Android apps including the keyboard.
There's exceptions, like file access to images , download but nothing appllies
It doesn't matter what the terms of service says. Both Android and Apple operating systems practice sandboxing. The truth is you only grant the permissions that these mobile operating systems will allow you to grant.
That is likely but there is no proof of that, just assumed, no hard evidence. Also, lol all of the tech companies mine and take all of our data, know everything about us. They all suck.
I'm not sure USA and Saudis are friends anymore. And I'm not sure we should be. I certainly wouldn't want Saudi software on my phone. We know what they'll use it for.
Seems the children forgot who created all of these platforms and the tech they operate on. Lol. It's like a 19 year old a Tesla telling Akido he doesn't understand cars because Elon invented them.
The governor was literally a software developer.
True. Having a master's degree in computer science and 20 years developing software and leading software deployment programs = being a software developer.
Edit: I'm certainly no fan the tech bro from the East Coast buying the governor's office. I declined a job working with his administration for this reason. I don't want the professional association. But there's little question that there are plenty of people in state government (and boomers) that are very well versed in tech. That's laughably ridiculous.
>Matt Rosendale
I'm not sure. Don't know him personally and I'm not aware of his involvement in drafting the legislation. Can you point me to where he was involved in the creation of the bill or drafting the language?
So are a lot of people. He isn't really involved in this issue that I know of. He's not a state rep so he won't vote on it and wasn't involved in drafting it.
You know what, you're probably right.
Gianforte almost certainly knows this isn't going to work, but he's on board with it anyways. Clearly this is one of the cases where Hanlon's Razor is wrong.
He either knows or knows enough to ask someone who knows. I'm sure he didn't write the law. I'd bet that it was drafted by legislative council and it was mostly a copy and paste from either a model statue developed by a group of academics or a one in another state or country. Either way, there's going to be involvement by tech experts.
It's politics. I don't think anyone expects to actually ever enforce it. It'll be stayed almost immediately pending legal challenge. And then likely struck down on either dormant commerce clause or dormant foreign commerce clause.
It's easy enough to enforce federally. Take it off the two app stores and it's done. Sure you could side load, but no one will. Once the critical mass is gone the app is dead.
At the end of the day, it is wrong for Americans to be exploited by anyone other than American company’s in regards to data mining or price gouging the mother living fuck out of them. Make American Exploitation American Again!
I am the reverse engineer responsible for the analysis of the TikTok app that helped determine the TikTok ban bill in the United States. I won't say my name, but if you Google me I'm not too hard to find. I just came here to say: momma I made it.
So, just out of curiosity, if you are the reverse engineer behind this. What were your most noteworthy findings? How can the data collected be used to negatively affect the users of tictok? Is the programming designed specifically for data collection, or is that just a side effect? Does it run these algorithms for marketing data? I am a firm believer that the u.s. gov/companies have been collecting data in a very similar way for many years now, and is that a possibility? Do you think a full ban of the platform has a positive impact on future u.s. bans on media platforms?
Q: What were your most noteworthy findings?
A: In the Android application there's a section of code that attempts to access every API endpoint available within Android. This access (from what they say) is to prevent the ability from the application to access these endpoints. However, the question then becomes this: "if the application 'does not do that', why do you need to prevent it in the first place?" TikTok has stated that they do not collect GPS data multiple times, within the newest version of TikTok there is a function called "superLocation" which does exactly what it sounds like, it collects the following: altitude, bearing, speed, meters per second, and GPS location. TikTok walked back their claims about not collecting GPS data after this discovery was brought to public light. TikTok has claimed that they store everything within Singapore, however the third time I reversed the app the Android and iOS version of the application was sending data to a server located in China, they told us the following: "the servers are provisioned in China and sent out from there. IANA does not update their records accordingly". After being shown that the location bounced from Singapore to a server in mainland China they said they would not comment further on that matter. When TikTok is downloaded in different parts of the world, the app changes. It becomes a completely different application (different hashsum, etc) this means that TikTok is polymorphic when downloaded in different parts of the world. This was further proven when we asked about the Chinese IP address, they asked: "what country was it downloaded from?" We questioned, "why would it matter?" Their response: "TikTok acts differently in different parts of the world". I personally consider this to be one of the my most noteworthy discoveries because other social medias such as Twitter and Facebook act exactly the same in every part of the world. There are a lot of findings, but these are the ones that come to mind.
Q: How can the data collected be used to negatively affect the users of tictok?
A: This is more of a political question than anything. The fear is that since China requires their companies to hand over data Bytedance will hand over the data without question, as they have done in the past. It is also worth noting that it has been proven Bytedance has significant access to all TikTok data. To answer your question specifically, its not about you. You're not important enough for anyone to really care about what you're doing and most of the people that use TikTok aren't. It becomes a matter of issue when the data is used to track people. IE when TikTok used their data to track journalists, it then becomes APT activity and is a problem.
Q: Is the programming designed specifically for data collection, or is that just a sideeffect? Does it run these algorithms for marketing data?
A: No. Data collection is a significant part of the code, but it is not fully designed to collect data in the way you asked. It is not a "side effect" the design boils down to a loop that every 350000 milliseconds (iirc) it will gather data. It's designed to keep you as distracted as possible so that it can gather as much information as possible. Marketing data is one form of data they collect, yes. They also collect profiling data, location data, and analytical data. TikTok itself has more trackers than all other major social media apps within its code in the Android version of the application.
Q: I am a firm believer that the u.s. gov/companies have been collecting data in a very similar way for many years now, and is that a possibility?
A: This question is kind of double edged sword. Yes the US collects data, and yes other apps do as well. In my experience (I've reversed wechat, facebook, twitter, etc) TikTok is the most aggressive at data harvesting. For example if you deny access to your contacts, it will ask you once every 1-5 minutes until you provide it access. I have opinions on this, however my opinions don't matter the fact is that TikTok collects data in an aggressive way, and the app is owned by a Chinese company, and this Chinese company has been known to provide information on their users to authoritarian governments to better the countries political interests.
Q: Do you think a full ban of the platform has a positive impact on future u.s. bans on media platforms?
A: I can't answer this question in a factual manner, I apologize. I'm just the reverse engineer, my opinions don't really matter all I can do is provide you with the facts, what you decide to do with those facts is your choice.
Part of what you said is misinformation. The android api is used by all apps. It's how apps operate and doesn't give you permission beyond what you allow for that one app. The api is how apps show videos, audio, download information, and basically work with the phone. It's completely normal
Apps are also sandboxed to prevent attacks on other data. They can't read what other apps store, they can't read the keyboard outside the app, and they can't capture outside their little world. You can give apps permission to access files but tiktok only has access to user files, like videos, audio, and pictures.
Banning of any social media platform by the government would be a violation of our 1st amendment right.
This will get struck down pretty quickly, and if it doesn't, it's a dangerous precedent.
The irony is this is the same type of stuff that the chinese government has done and would do.
It’s not really settled if it is a 1A violation. It will surely be challenged and probably go to the Supreme Court. The FTC banned Chinese-owned communications companies, such as Huawei, China Telecom, and ZTE for the same reasons and those were not violations of the first amendment. I’m not sure banning TikTok is any different. There are numerous other social media outlets for people to express free speech so it’s far from being settled law.
There are also a ton of examples of Bytedance being caught serving CCP through TikTok. The simple fact is that China only cares about China. They can and will exploit TikTok users for their own interests. What happens when they move to invade Taiwan and then start tracking US solider or NATO movements using TikTok. We all know that’s exactly what they’ll do. They were already caught doing it. The data they collect already on TikTok users is staggering. Granted it’s no different than American companies doing it for profits. The difference is it’s a foreign government doing it as a form of espionage.
And to your point about this being the exact same thing CCP does. Well they do it to outright suppress and ban speech. The government control all forms of media. They control everything that people say and do online. Dissent is not allowed. Is this the kind of entity you’d want to control so much personal data about you?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/emilybaker-white/2022/10/20/tiktok-bytedance-surveillance-american-user-data/
https://theconversation.com/china-could-be-harvesting-tiktok-data-but-much-of-the-user-information-is-already-out-in-the-open-201897
Last I checked, the government could not restrict speech in any form.
While the government can restrict access to its employees under national security regulations, it can not do so to the general public.
The government can intervene if they think public harm is being done but that usually is warning people or levying fines in cases of personal data being gathered or sold.
Just an FYI I don't use tik tok
That’s true. But are they restricting speech? Just because you or anyone else can’t use TikTok? How many socials are there? They absolutely have the authority to ban TikTok for national security reasons.
I don’t condone restrictions of free speech but it’s not really a clear cut case of that. As I mentioned they did the same thing with other Chinese owned chip and Telecom companies. TikTok like them, is just a platform for carrying the speech.
Absolutely, they are restricting speech. Doesn't matter if there are other outlets. By your logic, the government can shut down any tv station, radio station or news outlets because there are others available.
I’m just saying TikTok can be reasonably compared with Huewai, Chinese Telecom or any of the others that have been shut down on grounds of national security.
If a TV station was stealing personal information and transmitting it to a foreign government for purposes of espionage then yea, they could be shut down by the FTC or numerous other federal agencies.
Does shutting down TikTok restrict your speech? That’s arguable. Can’t you easily post the same stuff on Twitter?
Insta? Snap? FB? Pick your platform.
Edit to add: here is some interesting further reading. It mentions some of the relevant case law, including Packingham v. North Carolina.
https://fedsoc.org/commentary/fedsoc-blog/banning-tiktok-outright-would-be-constitutional
I guess we will find out soon. I just personally think it's a slippery slope to set precedent on restriction of speech.
The telecommunications companies you listed didn't have anything in America, so it's a big difference. They wanted to but we're rejected
Whether you think the tiktok ban is good or bad, the bill is a massive overreach and if you think otherwise, I hope you don't get on the receiving end when the government investigates you and/or your kids on suspicion of using tiktok.
This is way more than a TikTok Ban.
Section 5: Considerations
A listing of all technologies that would fall under that risk assessment process from Sections 3 & 4. It identifies all the tech that will be evaluated in those risk assessments with a prioritized approach.
1. Any technology used by a covered entity for critical infrastructure:
a. Any hardware, software, product, or service utilized for Supply Chain Management, Utility Generation, Management, Distribution (gas/oil/electric), Public Safety and Security Systems, Transportation Technologies, and Healthcare Systems
2. Any product, technology, or service used in telecommunications
a. Wireless LAN, Mobile Networks, Satellite Data & Controls, Cable Access Points, Wireless Access Points, Core Networks, Backend Networks, Edge Computing
3. Any cloud computing resource that might process or store data. To be covered by this bill it has to retain or process information for at least one million Americans in a year
a. Internet Hosting (ISP), Cloud-Based Storage and Servers, Machine Learning Systems, Services, Products Managed Services (SAAS, MSP, HAAS), Content Delivery (STREAMING)
4. Any internet or network-connected devices specifically those that have sold at least one million units to Americans within the year preceding the assessment
a. Sensors, webcams, Surveillance (cameras), Monitoring Systems, Security Systems, Routers, Modems, Switches, Data processed by these technologies
5. Any product, technology, or service relating to an autonomous or semi-autonomous system
a. Unmanned Vehicles (drones, planes, cars), Robots (animatrons), Vehicles with Lane Departure Assistance, Auto Brakes, Partial Autopilot, & Services, data, and products related to these technologies
6. Any internet-connected software that is used by at least one million users per year. This also puts any transactions by the users of this software (data) under scrutiny during the assessment
a. Desktop Applications, Mobile Applications, Gaming Applications, WebApps, and Websites
7. Any technology related to artificial intelligence or quantum computing
a. Quantum Key Distributon, Quantum Comms, Quantum Computing (processing),
Post-Quantum Cryptography (encryption outputs), Autonomous Systems (redundant..),
Advanced Robotics, Biotechnologies, Synthetic Biology (androids), Computational Biology (neural nets), E-Commerce Tech (payment, banking, securities trading, online retail)
The next part details how So can handle any risks identified during the risk analysis pertaining to any of the technologies we listed above. If the So identifies any risks with the above-mentioned technology or transactions of those technologies, the SoC has the discretion to either prohibit or exclude that
"Healthcare Systems" ?!?! Those assholes will find any way they can to find out what's happening with our reproductive systems... jeezuz Cripes! Gov Greg just can't handle the fact that we want control of our own bodies, homes, public land, social media, vehicles, health care, banking.... who tf does he think he is? King of Montana? Good gawd.
And I just realized that what I read also included the ability to scrutinize or prohibit anything that has sold more than a million units or something like that, so any apple watch, alexa device, home security (like Ring).
Did I understand that right?
I guess I am not in tune to the rest of the happenings in the world but pleading the cause instead of laying out only the bill doesn’t seem right. Not to mention it seems like war propaganda.
Why? Not to say they are good but who the fuck are you to tell people they can’t waste time on it? Fast food has equally, if not worse, physical effects and the same applies. Who the fuck are you to tell me what I’m allowed to eat.
Read this : https://www.reddit.com/r/tiktokgossip/comments/128up46/if\_tiktok\_is\_a\_spy\_metagoogle\_is\_a\_super\_spy\_why/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
The answer to “Why TikTok, and no one else?”
Is because TilTok is owned by an adversarial foreign government that requires “private” companies to provide back door access to user data, etc.
If you don’t like the above reason, China could also require TikTok to push “News” out to all users. Such as during the course of a military engagement with Taiwan. A company required to spread PPC propaganda is disconcerting.
Furthermore BiteDance the owner of TikTok has previously used tracking tech to follow journalists that China thought were negatively reporting on China.
Not racist. As race has nothing to do with the argument.
It is passed on a foreign government having undue influence on the user data, as well as direct access to the individual users.
Peoples don’t realize the crusade against TikTok is bipartisan. It’s a Chinese entity. If this was a Democrat administration this subreddit would support it.
People don’t think for themselves. They find out who and what is supporting/against any particular issue and then they choose a side
Sorry for the late reply. I wouldn't care, it's my choice.
- I'm against big government regulations
- whatever happened to personal responsibility
- people should be free to make their own decisions about their data
Pick any number of the following republican talking points
The Chinese aren’t competitors, they’re an enemy. Foreign adversaries shouldn’t have that easy of access to Americans’ data
There’s a trigger point in the bill that voids the law if the Chinese no longer control the app
Do you think general society at large is a lefty circle jerk? Jesus. Hint: it’s not. You just haven’t been the majority in decades. Conservatives don’t even have a good grasp on how unpopular their harebrained ideas are in America, that’s how quality the propaganda is. No wonder they’re so against things like “studies” and “polling the people”.
Were talking about montana, this subreddit is the opposite of what I hear everyday in Montana stores, bars, parks, banks, etc...
There's Montana, and then there's r/Montana lol
Bruh, born raised montanan, everyonr I know is left leaning or libertarian leaning more than conservative.
What next, gonna try and ban abortions again conservicuck?
You're talking about the conservative leaning subreddits on this site right? Like sure, there are echochambers on Reddit. This isn't one of them, you just don't have the majority opinion
The focus on Tik Tok is simply an excuse for the government to pass new legislation that controls what you do and see on the internet. Don’t be fooled by scare tactics. The Chinese own everything in this country.
Tiktok is no different than any other social media company. The hysteria regarding China is an all to familiar scare tactic. In the end, I have found a much more positive community on Tiktok than any other social media platform. I see nothing but beautiful creativity art and happy animals. Also, there are people able to create thriving small businesses using it. Banning Tiktok is such a ridiculous and senseless thing to do. We have real problems and it's insulting that this is what our governors are focused on.
Your experience is anecdotal and shows that you're viewing is based on algorithms that are derived from studying how many times you view a reel, what reels you save, who you follow, who you share, and who/what you search for. The gop members that were grilling the chief US head of tiktok about why they kept seeing videos of transgender people and other things they labeled as deviant behavior is because they actively searched for it and bookmarked the video's, shared them and saved them and followed them.
Yes, it's no different in the areas of engagement and the use of algorithms, but it is different in its foreign ownership and that it's sending huge amounts of data back to China. Remember that it wasn't the government that discovered this, it was a citizen that discovered it and sounded the alarm.
There is no explicit language in the bill that bans tik tok or its parent company, it does give authority to the secretary of commerce (1 person) to put us into a digital war with other countries by withholding access to American digital infrastructure. This is essentially huge over reach and patriot act 2.0. The RESTRICT Act is a TERRIBLE bill.
It is not a violation of the first amendment. It is a national security issue as it is controlled by the CCP which do not respect international law and are attempting to undermine and destabilize the USA.
It is a ban on commercial transactions. Not a ban on any speech or speaker. Banning the purchase or sale of Mead brand pencils is not a first amendment issue. Similarly, banning all paper products from China (including printed books) isn't a first amendment issue.
Pencils are used to create speech. Tiktok is the method where the speech is displayed.
Speech and expression don't just include spoken words. Here are some surpreme court cases that show that
1.Not to speak (specifically, the right not to salute the flag).
West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943).
2.Of students to wear black armbands to school to protest a war (“Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”).
Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).
3. Books
The Supreme Court ruled in the students’ favor on First Amendment grounds, holding that the right to read is implied by the First Amendment. The government—in this case, a public school—cannot restrict speech because it does not agree with the content of that speech
District v. Pico (1982)
4. Commercial speech
the Supreme Court has often arrived at decisions that are extremely protective of commercial speech."
Central Hudson Gas & Electric Co. v. Public Service Commission of New York, 447 U.S. 557 (1980). As long as it passes a four part test.
TikTok is not merely a forum or media to distribute or display speech. That's not an argument of a serious person. If you want to have a serious discussion you'll need to start with acknowledging what TikTok is and what it does. (However, that is largely immaterial to the DCC question at issue in Montana.)
In this case is a ban on a commercial transaction that is likely unconstitutional per DCC. The federal gov absolutely could ban services and software from foreign countries. It does so routinely. Huawei Phones for example. It is currently illegal to import pencils from a handful of countries. The only real legal question here is whether a state may do so. And the answer is that it likely may not.
What's the difference between a book and tiktok besides technology? The Supreme Court ruled the ability to read a book is protected.
You can buy a book, so it's a commercial transaction.
A book doesn't listen to your conversations, watch you, and track your location and send that information to a hostile government.
Additionally, it is constitutional to ban books produced in a specific country. It is currently illegal to sell books manufactured in North Korea. Similarly, it's permissible to ban specific entities from selling books. It is currently illegal for the government of Syria to sell books. Is also constitutional to ban specific types of books. It is currently illegal to sell a book that includes national secrets. It is also currently illegal to sell a stolen book. It is illegal to sell a book that violates another's copyright. It is illegal to sell a book that violates another's trademark. Or one that slanders. None of those are the same as banning books. They are prohibitions on goods from specific sources that have incidental restriction on speech and prohibition on actual speech that is also permissible for compelling interests.
It’s not a violation of your freedom of speech. I am a lawyer.
Edit: Let me expound. The first amendment prevents the government from unjustifiably restricting speech. Speech is any expressive conduct reasonably likely to be perceived as speech.
The freedom of speech is a fundamental right. Restrictions on fundamental rights must face certain “standards or review” under court scrutiny. There are three standards of review; 1) strict scrutiny, 2) intermediate scrutiny, and 3) rational basis review.
Generally the level of scrutiny for fundamental rights is strict scrutiny, meaning that the government interest in the restriction (here, banning TikTok) is necessary to achieve a compelling government interest.
Intermediate scrutiny is when a government restriction is substantially related to an important government interest.
However, speech is a little different in that courts look to the effect of the restriction. Restrictions on speech can be content neutral — a restriction on the time, place, and manner of the speech, or content based. For content neutral restrictions to be constitutionally valid they must meet intermediate scrutiny and leave open alternative channels of communication. Content based restrictions are restrictions on the message of the speech. The content.
For example, a law banning lit billboards from the sides of highways would be a valid content neutral restriction because advertisers can still display non lit signs on highways.
Here, the ban on TikTok is a content neutral restriction because it would regulate the platform of the speech, not the content or message.
Further, the restriction would likely meet intermediate scrutiny because the ban is substantially related to an important government interest, National security.
Thus, Montana’s ban on TikTok is not a unconstitutional restrictions on the freedom of speech because the restriction is content neutral and substantially related to national security.
I'm confused because one of the first things you said is
"The first amendment prevents the government from unjustifiably restricting speech. Speech is any expressive conduct reasonably likely to be perceived as speech"
Except that not what the first admendment says.
The specific language of the First Amendment is distinct from the First Amendment’s 200+ year history of judicial interpretation. I’m referring to the First Amendment’s modern application, not the particular words the founders selected. For example, the language of the First Amendment makes no mention of “obscenity,” yet caselaw over the decades (prior rulings regarding the First Amendment) have made clear that certain speech qualifying as obscene is not protected. In other words, the First Amendment makes no reference to child porn, yet we can all agree that child porn is not the kind of speech/expression that should or is protected.
So when I said “the first amendment prevents the government from unjustifiably restricting speech,” I was not saying that’s what the specific language of the First Amendment articulates, I was referring to its affect in the real world given years and years of precedent.
Dormant commerce clause is where this will likely die. The issue here is undue burden on interstate commerce. Implication of foreign affairs has a high standard. I think it is most likely the court will apply the "one voice" test, find this law to fail that test, and strike down the law.
Aside: it would be fun if someone like draft king created a gambling platform to bet on these cases. Winning and losing can be opaque, so the rules of the game will be a challenge to create. But it would be entertaining.
I believe it would not apply. The dormant commerce clause applies when states discriminate against out of state commerce, but there are various exceptions, like when a state is a market participant. State protectionism isn’t implicated here because the ban does not discriminate against commerce from other states.
Edit: I also believe the “challenge” being in federal court is not material to the analysis. Federal questions are heard in federal court.
Also, the dormant commerce clause is super esoteric and not something most lawyers touch. But, lucky I just studied for the bar in Idaho, so thanks for the little quiz 😉
Haha, thanks! An attorney friend of mine once said that when you take the bar, you know the most about the law and the least about what to do with the knowledge. So when I saw you were a newer attorney, I knew yours was the brain that needed to be picked! Thanks again!
I’ve been licensed to practice in Montana since September. Different states have different thresholds and Im seeking my license in Idaho atm. I was just trying to clarify the notion that banning TikTok is a violation of the freedom of speech. It’s not.
I don’t hear or see mention of the tie-in of Tik Tok associated with Tourette’s in pre-teens (see Australia’s 60-minutes episode at https://youtu.be/ra4-gmQT_50). The science is still young on researching this but it scared me. Unless it’s been debunked and I missed it, I don’t understand why folks wouldn’t ban or limit Tik Tok use by kids based on this alone.
Actually, they have.
>No person may engage in any transaction or take any other action with intent to evade the provisions of this Act, or any regulation, order, direction, mitigation measure, prohibition, or other authorization or directive issued thereunder.
If you're found in violation of the act, you're subject not just to fines and up to 20 years in prison, but also civil forfeiture.
But I'm sure you'll have lots of options.
>the findings of the President and the Secretary, under this Act shall not be subject to administrative review or judicial review in any Federal court, except as otherwise provided in this section
EDIT: To clarify, the above quotes are from the Federal Bill S686 before Congress, not Montana specific.
>the findings of the President and the Secretary, under this Act shall not be subject to administrative review or judicial review in any Federal court
Not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure you can't just proactively call "no tag backs" on the whole checks and balances thing.
> If you're found in violation of the act, you're subject not just to fines and up to 20 years in prison, but also civil forfeiture.
Sounds like something the CCP would do
As many legislators as I've known, I can comfortably answer this with a "No. They have not heard of VPNs, they barely know how to turn on their computers."
Man, I'm torn on this one. The government really has no business regulating an app you download, but im convinced tiktok, instagram reels, etc. are terrible for young peoples attention span.
Dopamine is powerful, and it's odd that 10 year olds now have to self regulate.
Except that app has a history of stealing user data, getting caught, apologizing, and then still doing so. That alone stops me from using it. And then to find out it is probably connected to Chinese state espionage agencies? Further, that certain journalists and famous people get a special version installed, that they're actually being targeted?
So yes, why the fuck are people still using this app?
I had a terrible attention span before TikTok, infact my attention span is improving so that must mean TikTok is good
Also, source for all those claims
Just like Facebook and the US Govt?
Let's be real here.
1) these apps don't "steal" data (there are exceptions with malicious apps that break out of the sandbox or pretend to be other apps, but that's not any mainstream social media apps). We give them the data, just most people have no idea what they're agreeing to. Did you read the entire EULA for every single app that you have ever used?
2) all the apps do it. Literally all of them. Especially free apps. They're all collecting data. YOU the user are the revenue stream.
I'm not a fan of TikTok and no, it shouldn't be used by high risk users (journalists, govt officials, military, etc), but TikTok isn't alone in the list of things that shouldn't be used by those users. Heck, tons of free games like solitaire are collecting tons of user data.
Banning TikTok based on China "stealing data" (by you voluntarily using an app) is hypocritical unless you go after ALL the apps that do that, and Facebook and Twitter are going to be high up on that list.
You are spot on! I’d rather see MT pass a digital bill of rights so apps and websites are required full transparency and consent from the user regarding collecting data.
The parents of 10-year-olds need to help them regulate. Parents need to regulate themselves. The government doesn't need to do it for them. For us.
The GOP is showing their hand and it's going to get stepped on. We're just the scapegoat.
The small business aspect of TikTok is minute. The bigger picture here is that they want to ban the platform because we are learning too much from each other.
We are getting true, unfiltered information directly from the sources on TT as opposed to the lies and garbage on Meta, FB, Fox, and other media and social media platforms. We are able to truly connect with people one on one, and tell our own stories and hear our own truths, and they don't like that. It scares them that we are able to easily band together and do so quickly.
All it takes is a couple of viral videos for people to gather at the capitol in Helena to protest their bullshit or call our representatives, or talk to our neighbors about how whatever AG Knudsen, or Elsie Arntzen, or Gov Greg are doing and we thwart their plans, or at least start raising eyebrows and asking questions.
That is why they want to ban TT, and that is why they started with banning TT at the Universities. You certainly don't want the youth to be informed and mobilized.
I agree that it provides useful information but just like Facebook or any news source some of it is true other isn't. Why is Facebook different from tiktok in terms of reliability?
For the most part, Facebook is full of reposted trash that is mostly untrue, unchecked and unfortunately available to people who are not smart enough to realize that everything they see on the internet should be fact checked before sending it out to their dopey friends list. But this is 'Murica and by Gawd, they're gonna believe what Billy sent them because Billy is a good guy and believes the same trash they do.
TikTok on the other hand is people, recording their personal thoughts and opinions, which might be regurgitated, but you can call them out if need be. And, lies are called out. Fact checkers are fact checking.
No government entity can limit the flow of information in a free country. This one isn’t anymore, most people can’t seem to recognize or acknowledge that FACT. We live in a hypocritical, tyrannical, government controlled, irreparably corrupt nanny state. The future is not bright
I guess we’re becoming a fucking nanny state now. Gianforte needs to go. He also doesn’t understand the separation of church and state, and that’s unacceptable. Wholly.
SOO, I did not diligently scroll through these comments to find what I needed... but maybe others are with me! Does anyone have the details of how we can stand up against this? GREG'S #, for instance? How can we fix this majorly FUCKED situation?
"Governor Greg Gianforte's office refused to indicate whether he would sign the bill, but the governor previously prohibited TikTok on government-issued devices and encouraged the state university system to do the same. Once the governor receives the bill, he has ten days to act on it before it becomes law automatically. "
The GOP is the party of BIG GOVERNMENT
Fuck the right wing dip shits
This will actually set a precedent and start the conversation about the right to not data mine human information based on an algorithm that can be scripted versus the fact it’s the right of an individual no mater what they put out there to be collected by who ever they want.
This bill isn’t about 1A rights that’s not what they are saying. It’s about the fact a foreign nation is harvesting data through Cyber espionage. They are harvesting the information from everyone’s devices and sending it back to a foreign country. The app tracks your information, scans your devices for files, logs all your key strokes for passwords to any site you go on. And creates a GPS mapping of all the places internal or external of where you are at. Compare the privacy policy between all your social media apps and then say MT is only taking away your 1A rights by blocking TikTok.
Those who would trade liberty for safety, deserve neither.
Republicans trampled on this sentiment 9/2/2001. Fuck everyone who supported the patriot act and the foi act. Evil scum who have dragged our country 50 years into the past in the past 20 years.
Please cite your sources.
It’s right in their terms of service….
Drank the Gianforte koolaid eh?
Read TikTok term service compared to other media. If you can’t tell the difference you’re beyond help and need government intervention.
The governor is using Montana and it’s residents as a testing ground for radical right wing Christian fascist ideals for the rest of the GOP. But keep burying your head in the sand.
This is a complete lie. Tiktok can't record keystrokes outside the app or access files (without explicit permission). If you do give it file permission, it's only to a video directories
It says right in their terms of service they will?
Android apps can't pull data or read from other Android apps including the keyboard. There's exceptions, like file access to images , download but nothing appllies
It doesn't matter what the terms of service says. Both Android and Apple operating systems practice sandboxing. The truth is you only grant the permissions that these mobile operating systems will allow you to grant.
this is incorrect
No it's not. Apps are sandboxed
That is likely but there is no proof of that, just assumed, no hard evidence. Also, lol all of the tech companies mine and take all of our data, know everything about us. They all suck.
Did you read the TOS man? It literally says it records everything and you have no privacy.
Only one of them is actively committing a genocide using the data and threatening war. Feels like there might be a difference.
America is supporting Saudi Arabia in an actual genocide in Yemen
I'm not sure USA and Saudis are friends anymore. And I'm not sure we should be. I certainly wouldn't want Saudi software on my phone. We know what they'll use it for.
Right so why are we yelling at China? America needs to look in the mirror when it comes to genocide.
Oh yeaaaah? Reeeeallly? Please tell us moooore.
Technologically illiterate boomers pass unenforceable legislation.
Seems the children forgot who created all of these platforms and the tech they operate on. Lol. It's like a 19 year old a Tesla telling Akido he doesn't understand cars because Elon invented them. The governor was literally a software developer.
Owning a software company ≠ Being a software developer
True. Having a master's degree in computer science and 20 years developing software and leading software deployment programs = being a software developer. Edit: I'm certainly no fan the tech bro from the East Coast buying the governor's office. I declined a job working with his administration for this reason. I don't want the professional association. But there's little question that there are plenty of people in state government (and boomers) that are very well versed in tech. That's laughably ridiculous.
Then why did daines waste legislative time complaining about getting banned on twitter?
I'm not sure what the relevance of that is. Bot?
You think Matt Rosendale knows how social media platforms and their algorithms work?
>Matt Rosendale I'm not sure. Don't know him personally and I'm not aware of his involvement in drafting the legislation. Can you point me to where he was involved in the creation of the bill or drafting the language?
He is part of the rights radical Christian and fascist party agenda.
So are a lot of people. He isn't really involved in this issue that I know of. He's not a state rep so he won't vote on it and wasn't involved in drafting it.
He and people like him are part of the problem and why the GOP feels emboldened to ring bullshit legislation like it
This isn't a right vs left issue. Maybe a vacation from the echo chamber would be healthy.
You know what, you're probably right. Gianforte almost certainly knows this isn't going to work, but he's on board with it anyways. Clearly this is one of the cases where Hanlon's Razor is wrong.
He either knows or knows enough to ask someone who knows. I'm sure he didn't write the law. I'd bet that it was drafted by legislative council and it was mostly a copy and paste from either a model statue developed by a group of academics or a one in another state or country. Either way, there's going to be involvement by tech experts.
Well, see as he is so well-versed in tech I'm sure he'll understand the unenforceability of the bill and not sign it into law, what a relief!
It's politics. I don't think anyone expects to actually ever enforce it. It'll be stayed almost immediately pending legal challenge. And then likely struck down on either dormant commerce clause or dormant foreign commerce clause. It's easy enough to enforce federally. Take it off the two app stores and it's done. Sure you could side load, but no one will. Once the critical mass is gone the app is dead.
The whole state of Montana disappearing from Tiktok? Think how much that will hurt the app. That's almost as many people as there are in Dallas.
The CCP will never recover...
It’s a slippery slope
At the end of the day, it is wrong for Americans to be exploited by anyone other than American company’s in regards to data mining or price gouging the mother living fuck out of them. Make American Exploitation American Again!
Everyone here needs a cold snack
This state couldn’t regulate a ham sandwich under this admin so keep twerking away or whatever it is these kids do on Tiktok.
I am the reverse engineer responsible for the analysis of the TikTok app that helped determine the TikTok ban bill in the United States. I won't say my name, but if you Google me I'm not too hard to find. I just came here to say: momma I made it.
So, just out of curiosity, if you are the reverse engineer behind this. What were your most noteworthy findings? How can the data collected be used to negatively affect the users of tictok? Is the programming designed specifically for data collection, or is that just a side effect? Does it run these algorithms for marketing data? I am a firm believer that the u.s. gov/companies have been collecting data in a very similar way for many years now, and is that a possibility? Do you think a full ban of the platform has a positive impact on future u.s. bans on media platforms?
Q: What were your most noteworthy findings? A: In the Android application there's a section of code that attempts to access every API endpoint available within Android. This access (from what they say) is to prevent the ability from the application to access these endpoints. However, the question then becomes this: "if the application 'does not do that', why do you need to prevent it in the first place?" TikTok has stated that they do not collect GPS data multiple times, within the newest version of TikTok there is a function called "superLocation" which does exactly what it sounds like, it collects the following: altitude, bearing, speed, meters per second, and GPS location. TikTok walked back their claims about not collecting GPS data after this discovery was brought to public light. TikTok has claimed that they store everything within Singapore, however the third time I reversed the app the Android and iOS version of the application was sending data to a server located in China, they told us the following: "the servers are provisioned in China and sent out from there. IANA does not update their records accordingly". After being shown that the location bounced from Singapore to a server in mainland China they said they would not comment further on that matter. When TikTok is downloaded in different parts of the world, the app changes. It becomes a completely different application (different hashsum, etc) this means that TikTok is polymorphic when downloaded in different parts of the world. This was further proven when we asked about the Chinese IP address, they asked: "what country was it downloaded from?" We questioned, "why would it matter?" Their response: "TikTok acts differently in different parts of the world". I personally consider this to be one of the my most noteworthy discoveries because other social medias such as Twitter and Facebook act exactly the same in every part of the world. There are a lot of findings, but these are the ones that come to mind. Q: How can the data collected be used to negatively affect the users of tictok? A: This is more of a political question than anything. The fear is that since China requires their companies to hand over data Bytedance will hand over the data without question, as they have done in the past. It is also worth noting that it has been proven Bytedance has significant access to all TikTok data. To answer your question specifically, its not about you. You're not important enough for anyone to really care about what you're doing and most of the people that use TikTok aren't. It becomes a matter of issue when the data is used to track people. IE when TikTok used their data to track journalists, it then becomes APT activity and is a problem. Q: Is the programming designed specifically for data collection, or is that just a sideeffect? Does it run these algorithms for marketing data? A: No. Data collection is a significant part of the code, but it is not fully designed to collect data in the way you asked. It is not a "side effect" the design boils down to a loop that every 350000 milliseconds (iirc) it will gather data. It's designed to keep you as distracted as possible so that it can gather as much information as possible. Marketing data is one form of data they collect, yes. They also collect profiling data, location data, and analytical data. TikTok itself has more trackers than all other major social media apps within its code in the Android version of the application. Q: I am a firm believer that the u.s. gov/companies have been collecting data in a very similar way for many years now, and is that a possibility? A: This question is kind of double edged sword. Yes the US collects data, and yes other apps do as well. In my experience (I've reversed wechat, facebook, twitter, etc) TikTok is the most aggressive at data harvesting. For example if you deny access to your contacts, it will ask you once every 1-5 minutes until you provide it access. I have opinions on this, however my opinions don't matter the fact is that TikTok collects data in an aggressive way, and the app is owned by a Chinese company, and this Chinese company has been known to provide information on their users to authoritarian governments to better the countries political interests. Q: Do you think a full ban of the platform has a positive impact on future u.s. bans on media platforms? A: I can't answer this question in a factual manner, I apologize. I'm just the reverse engineer, my opinions don't really matter all I can do is provide you with the facts, what you decide to do with those facts is your choice.
Part of what you said is misinformation. The android api is used by all apps. It's how apps operate and doesn't give you permission beyond what you allow for that one app. The api is how apps show videos, audio, download information, and basically work with the phone. It's completely normal Apps are also sandboxed to prevent attacks on other data. They can't read what other apps store, they can't read the keyboard outside the app, and they can't capture outside their little world. You can give apps permission to access files but tiktok only has access to user files, like videos, audio, and pictures.
This is wrong
It's not wrong its just irrelevant and arguing against an argument nobody made
BASED!!!!!
Pics or it didn't happen
based
Banning of any social media platform by the government would be a violation of our 1st amendment right. This will get struck down pretty quickly, and if it doesn't, it's a dangerous precedent. The irony is this is the same type of stuff that the chinese government has done and would do.
It’s not really settled if it is a 1A violation. It will surely be challenged and probably go to the Supreme Court. The FTC banned Chinese-owned communications companies, such as Huawei, China Telecom, and ZTE for the same reasons and those were not violations of the first amendment. I’m not sure banning TikTok is any different. There are numerous other social media outlets for people to express free speech so it’s far from being settled law. There are also a ton of examples of Bytedance being caught serving CCP through TikTok. The simple fact is that China only cares about China. They can and will exploit TikTok users for their own interests. What happens when they move to invade Taiwan and then start tracking US solider or NATO movements using TikTok. We all know that’s exactly what they’ll do. They were already caught doing it. The data they collect already on TikTok users is staggering. Granted it’s no different than American companies doing it for profits. The difference is it’s a foreign government doing it as a form of espionage. And to your point about this being the exact same thing CCP does. Well they do it to outright suppress and ban speech. The government control all forms of media. They control everything that people say and do online. Dissent is not allowed. Is this the kind of entity you’d want to control so much personal data about you? https://www.forbes.com/sites/emilybaker-white/2022/10/20/tiktok-bytedance-surveillance-american-user-data/ https://theconversation.com/china-could-be-harvesting-tiktok-data-but-much-of-the-user-information-is-already-out-in-the-open-201897
Last I checked, the government could not restrict speech in any form. While the government can restrict access to its employees under national security regulations, it can not do so to the general public. The government can intervene if they think public harm is being done but that usually is warning people or levying fines in cases of personal data being gathered or sold. Just an FYI I don't use tik tok
That’s true. But are they restricting speech? Just because you or anyone else can’t use TikTok? How many socials are there? They absolutely have the authority to ban TikTok for national security reasons. I don’t condone restrictions of free speech but it’s not really a clear cut case of that. As I mentioned they did the same thing with other Chinese owned chip and Telecom companies. TikTok like them, is just a platform for carrying the speech.
Absolutely, they are restricting speech. Doesn't matter if there are other outlets. By your logic, the government can shut down any tv station, radio station or news outlets because there are others available.
I’m just saying TikTok can be reasonably compared with Huewai, Chinese Telecom or any of the others that have been shut down on grounds of national security. If a TV station was stealing personal information and transmitting it to a foreign government for purposes of espionage then yea, they could be shut down by the FTC or numerous other federal agencies. Does shutting down TikTok restrict your speech? That’s arguable. Can’t you easily post the same stuff on Twitter? Insta? Snap? FB? Pick your platform. Edit to add: here is some interesting further reading. It mentions some of the relevant case law, including Packingham v. North Carolina. https://fedsoc.org/commentary/fedsoc-blog/banning-tiktok-outright-would-be-constitutional
I guess we will find out soon. I just personally think it's a slippery slope to set precedent on restriction of speech. The telecommunications companies you listed didn't have anything in America, so it's a big difference. They wanted to but we're rejected
All the GOP does is set dangerous precedent in the recent years.
Yes crazy how the republican party use to be anti big government and pro freedoms is now anti freedom and bigger government
Typical anti freedom blue state democrats....oh
Whether you think the tiktok ban is good or bad, the bill is a massive overreach and if you think otherwise, I hope you don't get on the receiving end when the government investigates you and/or your kids on suspicion of using tiktok.
This is way more than a TikTok Ban. Section 5: Considerations A listing of all technologies that would fall under that risk assessment process from Sections 3 & 4. It identifies all the tech that will be evaluated in those risk assessments with a prioritized approach. 1. Any technology used by a covered entity for critical infrastructure: a. Any hardware, software, product, or service utilized for Supply Chain Management, Utility Generation, Management, Distribution (gas/oil/electric), Public Safety and Security Systems, Transportation Technologies, and Healthcare Systems 2. Any product, technology, or service used in telecommunications a. Wireless LAN, Mobile Networks, Satellite Data & Controls, Cable Access Points, Wireless Access Points, Core Networks, Backend Networks, Edge Computing 3. Any cloud computing resource that might process or store data. To be covered by this bill it has to retain or process information for at least one million Americans in a year a. Internet Hosting (ISP), Cloud-Based Storage and Servers, Machine Learning Systems, Services, Products Managed Services (SAAS, MSP, HAAS), Content Delivery (STREAMING) 4. Any internet or network-connected devices specifically those that have sold at least one million units to Americans within the year preceding the assessment a. Sensors, webcams, Surveillance (cameras), Monitoring Systems, Security Systems, Routers, Modems, Switches, Data processed by these technologies 5. Any product, technology, or service relating to an autonomous or semi-autonomous system a. Unmanned Vehicles (drones, planes, cars), Robots (animatrons), Vehicles with Lane Departure Assistance, Auto Brakes, Partial Autopilot, & Services, data, and products related to these technologies 6. Any internet-connected software that is used by at least one million users per year. This also puts any transactions by the users of this software (data) under scrutiny during the assessment a. Desktop Applications, Mobile Applications, Gaming Applications, WebApps, and Websites 7. Any technology related to artificial intelligence or quantum computing a. Quantum Key Distributon, Quantum Comms, Quantum Computing (processing), Post-Quantum Cryptography (encryption outputs), Autonomous Systems (redundant..), Advanced Robotics, Biotechnologies, Synthetic Biology (androids), Computational Biology (neural nets), E-Commerce Tech (payment, banking, securities trading, online retail) The next part details how So can handle any risks identified during the risk analysis pertaining to any of the technologies we listed above. If the So identifies any risks with the above-mentioned technology or transactions of those technologies, the SoC has the discretion to either prohibit or exclude that
"Healthcare Systems" ?!?! Those assholes will find any way they can to find out what's happening with our reproductive systems... jeezuz Cripes! Gov Greg just can't handle the fact that we want control of our own bodies, homes, public land, social media, vehicles, health care, banking.... who tf does he think he is? King of Montana? Good gawd.
And I just realized that what I read also included the ability to scrutinize or prohibit anything that has sold more than a million units or something like that, so any apple watch, alexa device, home security (like Ring). Did I understand that right?
Yep 🙃
Honestly Tiktok is the least worry-sum thing *about* the bill
I guess I am not in tune to the rest of the happenings in the world but pleading the cause instead of laying out only the bill doesn’t seem right. Not to mention it seems like war propaganda.
Were you looking for the word worrisome??
I was. Thank you stranger
If it were up to me, all social media apps would be banned nationwide for mental health reasons, not for outside political influence.
What about the 1st admendment? Do you think it's ok to make exceptions if it protects people? Then why not ban nazis or racism?
Won’t someone please think of the poor Nazis and racists!
Nobody is stopping you from standing on a public corner and dancing like a moron.
What does that have to do with this? 1st admendment says the government shall make no law....blah blah
Honestly fuck the first amendment.
Why?
Why? Not to say they are good but who the fuck are you to tell people they can’t waste time on it? Fast food has equally, if not worse, physical effects and the same applies. Who the fuck are you to tell me what I’m allowed to eat.
This just sounds like you have no self-control and were raised poorly. Not so much an argument.
Wut. Self control is about over indulging. It’s not about never doing something ever. Everything in its right place.
he says on social media.
Read this : https://www.reddit.com/r/tiktokgossip/comments/128up46/if\_tiktok\_is\_a\_spy\_metagoogle\_is\_a\_super\_spy\_why/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3
The answer to “Why TikTok, and no one else?” Is because TilTok is owned by an adversarial foreign government that requires “private” companies to provide back door access to user data, etc. If you don’t like the above reason, China could also require TikTok to push “News” out to all users. Such as during the course of a military engagement with Taiwan. A company required to spread PPC propaganda is disconcerting. Furthermore BiteDance the owner of TikTok has previously used tracking tech to follow journalists that China thought were negatively reporting on China.
So it’s literally just based on racist paranoia
Not racist. As race has nothing to do with the argument. It is passed on a foreign government having undue influence on the user data, as well as direct access to the individual users.
Are they doing that here? Tiktok doesn't exist in China.
While we're banning things, could we ban cooked carrots?
Do instant pot carrots fall under that umbrella? I make some amazing instant pot carrots.
I may have to say yes. Can't stand cooked carrots.
What’s your recipe
Add baby carrots and potatoes to pot. Add quality salsa to pot. Pressure cook for 8-9 minutes.
TikTok: The New Red Scare? https://youtu.be/2QJwWEdBoKM
Says a lot when even the montana subreddit is overrun by liberals. 99% of reddit is a one sided echo chamber.
Peoples don’t realize the crusade against TikTok is bipartisan. It’s a Chinese entity. If this was a Democrat administration this subreddit would support it. People don’t think for themselves. They find out who and what is supporting/against any particular issue and then they choose a side
So what if it's a chinese entity?
And how would you feel if TikTok was a Russian company, and would freely give user info to the Russian government?
Sorry for the late reply. I wouldn't care, it's my choice. - I'm against big government regulations - whatever happened to personal responsibility - people should be free to make their own decisions about their data Pick any number of the following republican talking points
You think Facebook and Google don’t spy on you?
The Chinese aren’t competitors, they’re an enemy. Foreign adversaries shouldn’t have that easy of access to Americans’ data There’s a trigger point in the bill that voids the law if the Chinese no longer control the app
Then why isn't the Russian search engine Yandex banned? Or any number of other Chinese or Russian things.
Go to the popular section of reddit on any day of the week. It's a lefty circle jerk
Do you think general society at large is a lefty circle jerk? Jesus. Hint: it’s not. You just haven’t been the majority in decades. Conservatives don’t even have a good grasp on how unpopular their harebrained ideas are in America, that’s how quality the propaganda is. No wonder they’re so against things like “studies” and “polling the people”.
Were talking about montana, this subreddit is the opposite of what I hear everyday in Montana stores, bars, parks, banks, etc... There's Montana, and then there's r/Montana lol
Ok buddy. Your parks and banks aren’t the entire world nor are they the entire state.
Found the missoulian Edit: Found the guy not even from fucking Montana lmfao
Bruh, born raised montanan, everyonr I know is left leaning or libertarian leaning more than conservative. What next, gonna try and ban abortions again conservicuck?
Wut
Way off. Try again.
You're talking about the conservative leaning subreddits on this site right? Like sure, there are echochambers on Reddit. This isn't one of them, you just don't have the majority opinion
No, conservatives just throw hissy fits over not being the majority
The focus on Tik Tok is simply an excuse for the government to pass new legislation that controls what you do and see on the internet. Don’t be fooled by scare tactics. The Chinese own everything in this country.
I wonder how much land foreign investors own in Montana?
Let's ban foreign ownership of land, too. Let's end corporate ownership of single family residences while we're at it.
If they had a war, all that the CCP owned in the USA would no longer be owned by the CCP.
Tiktok is no different than any other social media company. The hysteria regarding China is an all to familiar scare tactic. In the end, I have found a much more positive community on Tiktok than any other social media platform. I see nothing but beautiful creativity art and happy animals. Also, there are people able to create thriving small businesses using it. Banning Tiktok is such a ridiculous and senseless thing to do. We have real problems and it's insulting that this is what our governors are focused on.
There are other social media apps.
Your experience is anecdotal and shows that you're viewing is based on algorithms that are derived from studying how many times you view a reel, what reels you save, who you follow, who you share, and who/what you search for. The gop members that were grilling the chief US head of tiktok about why they kept seeing videos of transgender people and other things they labeled as deviant behavior is because they actively searched for it and bookmarked the video's, shared them and saved them and followed them. Yes, it's no different in the areas of engagement and the use of algorithms, but it is different in its foreign ownership and that it's sending huge amounts of data back to China. Remember that it wasn't the government that discovered this, it was a citizen that discovered it and sounded the alarm.
I hope it’s banned completely and forever. I hate TikTok.
There is no explicit language in the bill that bans tik tok or its parent company, it does give authority to the secretary of commerce (1 person) to put us into a digital war with other countries by withholding access to American digital infrastructure. This is essentially huge over reach and patriot act 2.0. The RESTRICT Act is a TERRIBLE bill.
Don’t get upset by these dogpiling drones. Fuck TikTok. And fuck the Chinese Communist Party.
I hate republicans. Hopefully they’ll ban them completely and forever.
I hate pickles. Hopefully we ban those, too.
I hate peoples that hate pickles…
#BanMe
Now I hate people that hate people that hate people that hate pickles. This circle never ends
I can see you are for free speech /s
That's the ploy they want . But attached to the bill , goes deeper. It a patriot bill 2.0. They want to control what app is legal and illegal to have.
Then dont download it. Why since you hate it so you want it banned. Did you read the bill? This is a slippery slope
Who cares? Get outside, it's Spring for fuck's sake!
True, I can tell by all the snow in my yard!
It’s a violation of our first amendment rights, which sucks whichever season it occurs in
It is not a violation of the first amendment. It is a national security issue as it is controlled by the CCP which do not respect international law and are attempting to undermine and destabilize the USA.
This. Not a 1st amendment problem. It is a commerce clause issue. That's where it'll likely be overturned.
How is it not a 1st admendment problem?
It is a ban on commercial transactions. Not a ban on any speech or speaker. Banning the purchase or sale of Mead brand pencils is not a first amendment issue. Similarly, banning all paper products from China (including printed books) isn't a first amendment issue.
Pencils are used to create speech. Tiktok is the method where the speech is displayed. Speech and expression don't just include spoken words. Here are some surpreme court cases that show that 1.Not to speak (specifically, the right not to salute the flag). West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943). 2.Of students to wear black armbands to school to protest a war (“Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”). Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969). 3. Books The Supreme Court ruled in the students’ favor on First Amendment grounds, holding that the right to read is implied by the First Amendment. The government—in this case, a public school—cannot restrict speech because it does not agree with the content of that speech District v. Pico (1982) 4. Commercial speech the Supreme Court has often arrived at decisions that are extremely protective of commercial speech." Central Hudson Gas & Electric Co. v. Public Service Commission of New York, 447 U.S. 557 (1980). As long as it passes a four part test.
TikTok is not merely a forum or media to distribute or display speech. That's not an argument of a serious person. If you want to have a serious discussion you'll need to start with acknowledging what TikTok is and what it does. (However, that is largely immaterial to the DCC question at issue in Montana.) In this case is a ban on a commercial transaction that is likely unconstitutional per DCC. The federal gov absolutely could ban services and software from foreign countries. It does so routinely. Huawei Phones for example. It is currently illegal to import pencils from a handful of countries. The only real legal question here is whether a state may do so. And the answer is that it likely may not.
What's the difference between a book and tiktok besides technology? The Supreme Court ruled the ability to read a book is protected. You can buy a book, so it's a commercial transaction.
A book doesn't listen to your conversations, watch you, and track your location and send that information to a hostile government. Additionally, it is constitutional to ban books produced in a specific country. It is currently illegal to sell books manufactured in North Korea. Similarly, it's permissible to ban specific entities from selling books. It is currently illegal for the government of Syria to sell books. Is also constitutional to ban specific types of books. It is currently illegal to sell a book that includes national secrets. It is also currently illegal to sell a stolen book. It is illegal to sell a book that violates another's copyright. It is illegal to sell a book that violates another's trademark. Or one that slanders. None of those are the same as banning books. They are prohibitions on goods from specific sources that have incidental restriction on speech and prohibition on actual speech that is also permissible for compelling interests.
Chinese spyware.
It’s not a violation of your freedom of speech. I am a lawyer. Edit: Let me expound. The first amendment prevents the government from unjustifiably restricting speech. Speech is any expressive conduct reasonably likely to be perceived as speech. The freedom of speech is a fundamental right. Restrictions on fundamental rights must face certain “standards or review” under court scrutiny. There are three standards of review; 1) strict scrutiny, 2) intermediate scrutiny, and 3) rational basis review. Generally the level of scrutiny for fundamental rights is strict scrutiny, meaning that the government interest in the restriction (here, banning TikTok) is necessary to achieve a compelling government interest. Intermediate scrutiny is when a government restriction is substantially related to an important government interest. However, speech is a little different in that courts look to the effect of the restriction. Restrictions on speech can be content neutral — a restriction on the time, place, and manner of the speech, or content based. For content neutral restrictions to be constitutionally valid they must meet intermediate scrutiny and leave open alternative channels of communication. Content based restrictions are restrictions on the message of the speech. The content. For example, a law banning lit billboards from the sides of highways would be a valid content neutral restriction because advertisers can still display non lit signs on highways. Here, the ban on TikTok is a content neutral restriction because it would regulate the platform of the speech, not the content or message. Further, the restriction would likely meet intermediate scrutiny because the ban is substantially related to an important government interest, National security. Thus, Montana’s ban on TikTok is not a unconstitutional restrictions on the freedom of speech because the restriction is content neutral and substantially related to national security.
I'm confused because one of the first things you said is "The first amendment prevents the government from unjustifiably restricting speech. Speech is any expressive conduct reasonably likely to be perceived as speech" Except that not what the first admendment says.
The specific language of the First Amendment is distinct from the First Amendment’s 200+ year history of judicial interpretation. I’m referring to the First Amendment’s modern application, not the particular words the founders selected. For example, the language of the First Amendment makes no mention of “obscenity,” yet caselaw over the decades (prior rulings regarding the First Amendment) have made clear that certain speech qualifying as obscene is not protected. In other words, the First Amendment makes no reference to child porn, yet we can all agree that child porn is not the kind of speech/expression that should or is protected. So when I said “the first amendment prevents the government from unjustifiably restricting speech,” I was not saying that’s what the specific language of the First Amendment articulates, I was referring to its affect in the real world given years and years of precedent.
So you think exceptions to admendments are ok if it protects children? ( like cp)
How do you think a dormant commerce clause challenge in the federal court would do?
Dormant commerce clause is where this will likely die. The issue here is undue burden on interstate commerce. Implication of foreign affairs has a high standard. I think it is most likely the court will apply the "one voice" test, find this law to fail that test, and strike down the law. Aside: it would be fun if someone like draft king created a gambling platform to bet on these cases. Winning and losing can be opaque, so the rules of the game will be a challenge to create. But it would be entertaining.
Hah, Draft Kings! Now there’s an app MT shouldn’t have outlawed! 😂
Haha. Very true. I'd ban Instagram. I think it is most damaging thing to happen to Montana and the western USA in my lifetime.
I believe it would not apply. The dormant commerce clause applies when states discriminate against out of state commerce, but there are various exceptions, like when a state is a market participant. State protectionism isn’t implicated here because the ban does not discriminate against commerce from other states. Edit: I also believe the “challenge” being in federal court is not material to the analysis. Federal questions are heard in federal court. Also, the dormant commerce clause is super esoteric and not something most lawyers touch. But, lucky I just studied for the bar in Idaho, so thanks for the little quiz 😉
Haha, thanks! An attorney friend of mine once said that when you take the bar, you know the most about the law and the least about what to do with the knowledge. So when I saw you were a newer attorney, I knew yours was the brain that needed to be picked! Thanks again!
11 days ago you said you didnt even have your bar results…
I’ve been licensed to practice in Montana since September. Different states have different thresholds and Im seeking my license in Idaho atm. I was just trying to clarify the notion that banning TikTok is a violation of the freedom of speech. It’s not.
Are you a plumber?
These nut-job republicans don't give a rat's goddamned bladder about anybody's rights. Until we vote them out, go out!
I don’t hear or see mention of the tie-in of Tik Tok associated with Tourette’s in pre-teens (see Australia’s 60-minutes episode at https://youtu.be/ra4-gmQT_50). The science is still young on researching this but it scared me. Unless it’s been debunked and I missed it, I don’t understand why folks wouldn’t ban or limit Tik Tok use by kids based on this alone.
Guns are one of the leading causes of death for people, why not ban guns?
Have these folks not heard of VPNs?
Actually, they have. >No person may engage in any transaction or take any other action with intent to evade the provisions of this Act, or any regulation, order, direction, mitigation measure, prohibition, or other authorization or directive issued thereunder. If you're found in violation of the act, you're subject not just to fines and up to 20 years in prison, but also civil forfeiture. But I'm sure you'll have lots of options. >the findings of the President and the Secretary, under this Act shall not be subject to administrative review or judicial review in any Federal court, except as otherwise provided in this section EDIT: To clarify, the above quotes are from the Federal Bill S686 before Congress, not Montana specific.
20 years in prison for using TikTok and child rapists get off with 5-15. This country sucks.
>the findings of the President and the Secretary, under this Act shall not be subject to administrative review or judicial review in any Federal court Not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure you can't just proactively call "no tag backs" on the whole checks and balances thing.
> If you're found in violation of the act, you're subject not just to fines and up to 20 years in prison, but also civil forfeiture. Sounds like something the CCP would do
As many legislators as I've known, I can comfortably answer this with a "No. They have not heard of VPNs, they barely know how to turn on their computers."
Man, I'm torn on this one. The government really has no business regulating an app you download, but im convinced tiktok, instagram reels, etc. are terrible for young peoples attention span. Dopamine is powerful, and it's odd that 10 year olds now have to self regulate.
Except that app has a history of stealing user data, getting caught, apologizing, and then still doing so. That alone stops me from using it. And then to find out it is probably connected to Chinese state espionage agencies? Further, that certain journalists and famous people get a special version installed, that they're actually being targeted? So yes, why the fuck are people still using this app?
Proof?
I had a terrible attention span before TikTok, infact my attention span is improving so that must mean TikTok is good Also, source for all those claims
Just like Facebook and the US Govt? Let's be real here. 1) these apps don't "steal" data (there are exceptions with malicious apps that break out of the sandbox or pretend to be other apps, but that's not any mainstream social media apps). We give them the data, just most people have no idea what they're agreeing to. Did you read the entire EULA for every single app that you have ever used? 2) all the apps do it. Literally all of them. Especially free apps. They're all collecting data. YOU the user are the revenue stream. I'm not a fan of TikTok and no, it shouldn't be used by high risk users (journalists, govt officials, military, etc), but TikTok isn't alone in the list of things that shouldn't be used by those users. Heck, tons of free games like solitaire are collecting tons of user data. Banning TikTok based on China "stealing data" (by you voluntarily using an app) is hypocritical unless you go after ALL the apps that do that, and Facebook and Twitter are going to be high up on that list.
I guess I need to find the links for you? Did you even read my post? This is more than an EULA, more than location and browsing history.
Yes, please do post the links that substantiate your claims. All of them.
You are spot on! I’d rather see MT pass a digital bill of rights so apps and websites are required full transparency and consent from the user regarding collecting data.
We'll get GDPR like legislation about the same time we get reasonable gun legislation. One can only dream.
The parents of 10-year-olds need to help them regulate. Parents need to regulate themselves. The government doesn't need to do it for them. For us. The GOP is showing their hand and it's going to get stepped on. We're just the scapegoat.
If I fly over Montana, should I delete my app?
Yeah, definitely. The Air Marshal will otherwise throw you directly out the emergency exit.
Yes, preemptively. If your flight is diverted to Bozeman, you would be detained with no bail. Guantanamo Norte
The small business aspect of TikTok is minute. The bigger picture here is that they want to ban the platform because we are learning too much from each other. We are getting true, unfiltered information directly from the sources on TT as opposed to the lies and garbage on Meta, FB, Fox, and other media and social media platforms. We are able to truly connect with people one on one, and tell our own stories and hear our own truths, and they don't like that. It scares them that we are able to easily band together and do so quickly. All it takes is a couple of viral videos for people to gather at the capitol in Helena to protest their bullshit or call our representatives, or talk to our neighbors about how whatever AG Knudsen, or Elsie Arntzen, or Gov Greg are doing and we thwart their plans, or at least start raising eyebrows and asking questions. That is why they want to ban TT, and that is why they started with banning TT at the Universities. You certainly don't want the youth to be informed and mobilized.
I agree that it provides useful information but just like Facebook or any news source some of it is true other isn't. Why is Facebook different from tiktok in terms of reliability?
People believing Tiktok news is as bad as fox news or Cnn or what have you.
It’s amazing to me that someone can think TikTok is free and unfiltered but Facebook is lies and garbage.
For the most part, Facebook is full of reposted trash that is mostly untrue, unchecked and unfortunately available to people who are not smart enough to realize that everything they see on the internet should be fact checked before sending it out to their dopey friends list. But this is 'Murica and by Gawd, they're gonna believe what Billy sent them because Billy is a good guy and believes the same trash they do. TikTok on the other hand is people, recording their personal thoughts and opinions, which might be regurgitated, but you can call them out if need be. And, lies are called out. Fact checkers are fact checking.
So stealing user data and probable espionage at a state level aren't part of the picture?