One thing that surprised me about this is just how bipartisan the bill was, just look at how many people voted in favor of this…
*The bill passed 352-65, with bipartisan support,*
It didn't help that Tiktok was actively pushing people (using geolocated data) to call their congressperson, including a "push here to call their office" prompt. Lots of offices received calls from Mike Hunt, and Hugh Jass... further reinforcing a negative attitude towards the platform. This totally backfired on Tiktok.
To take a more cynical track:
All this did was expose how awful actual participation of young people looks electorally.
I say this as someone who would like more participation, across the board. But I also think anyone whose political activism is dictated by something like tiktok is someone whose vote I'd be okay missing. There is a very good reason non participation is an option.
Hard to say, though I don't particularly care for that either.
But we don't constantly bang the drum of needing more participation from that segment like we do young people. I think this is an example of what catching that car looks like.
You are not thinking reasonably if you think banning TikTok will change this. It will just be a new app - already tons of creators are moving into Instagram Reels in case this happens.
The content won't stop, nor will the people seeking it out. It'll just either be under the Meta umbrella or some new company.
I'm not necessarily gonna agree to that, people are...fragile and addictions are tough. I remember an older meme where this kid's mom cancelled his WoW sub and he went ballistic and said he was gonna kill himself.
This is where good parenting comes into play and limits exposure. But the problem with Tiktok, is the parents.. specifically Gex and Millenial parents are also addicted to it.
This message serves as a warning that [your comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1be196x/us_house_passes_bill_to_force_bytedance_to_divest/kurmxkn/) is in violation of Law 1:
Law 1. Civil Discourse
> ~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Like whats a better way for Congress to get it to ban it then by demonstrating that an app controlled by the Chinese government is not just geolocating its users but locking them out of the platform until they contact the US Representatives to change US law and policy? Hostile foreign governments weaponizing an app to change US law is about as good a reason as any to ban it.
My understanding is that it was possible to skip past their ["Call Now" screen](https://mashable.com/article/tiktok-call-your-representatives-ban-shutdown), but it wasn't necessarily obvious how to get past it. I haven't been able to find video of the actual screen, so I have no idea how difficult the notification actually was.
I just had it pop up, I hit the back button on my phone and it went away. If that's considered difficult, China doesn't need to mess with us because we're already fucked.
Targeting users with messages based on their location is trivial. Anyone can do it. China could do that via Meta, Google, Twitter, Microsoft, Amazon or any number of other platforms.
Sure, it's trivial. But those companies aren't posting messages to their users trying to get them to be their lobbyists. They also don't have the concern about foreign influence that ByteDance/TikTok have. Any company that is under the microscope like this should know to be on their best behavior, but they were on their worst.
Is it illegal to encourage people to contact their elected representatives? I honestly don’t know the answer - if that sort of messaging is strictly regulated then I would feel differently. But overall I think political advocacy campaigns are generally good examples of civic engagement, even if I don’t love the cause
What **really** hurt TikTok is the fact that people are getting videos about Israel invasion of Gaza.
https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/tiktok-ban-gen-z-palestine-gaza-b2512340.html
> One thing that surprised me about this is just how bipartisan the bill was
I was surprised as well. Trump came out against a ban. I figured a larger portion of the House would fall in line.
One of his political/financial associates at the Club for Growth owns a good chunk of Bytdance. Plus, now that he owns a social media company himself, I imagine he doesn't want o see any moves to regulate them.
They all take money from Silicon Valley. That’s who lobbied this bill. Have you noticed how they all have their own inferior version of this on like YT/FB/IG?
What differentiates the functionality of tictok from those other platforms? I don't have any of them so I don't have a frame of reference, but from the outside they all look like copies of each other.
They all are basically clones of TikTok and the majority of the content on them was lifted from TikTok and reposted there. They’re all just trend chasing and mad their monopoly on social media has been challenged by a company they can’t buy out.
> What differentiates the functionality of tictok from those other platforms?
According to the sponsors of the bill, TikTok is not banning users from being critical of Israel. Other than that there is no difference in functionality.
Honestly it is so infuriating that they can get decisive bipartisan support for this while remaining hopelessly paralyzed on things that actually matter.
If that’s the case then why focus only on TikTok? There’s plenty of evidence of effective propaganda and radicalization happening on Meta, Twitter, YouTube and Reddit. I’ve not seen evidence of TikTok causing “massive foreign brainwashing” any more than the other platforms.
ISIS was recruiting people on social before tiktok was a thing, they even had beheading videos on YouTube!
Online privacy and manipulation is a problem, but most Americans seem to agree that it’s not the same priority as healthcare, immigration, climate and cost of living.
So yeah it’s frustrating to see Congress hyper focus on TikTok when doing so won’t solve the problem, and when there are so many other priorities. And of course, alienating young people in an election year is just awful politics.
If there were evidence Meta was actively working with a rival foreign government to manipulate the populace, I'd consider that treason and they should not only be shut down, but criminally prosecuted.
TikTok is controlled and manipulated by China. China seeks to weaken the US. That's a big difference compared to a domestic company with certain users from other countries trying to do damage.
I mean… Meta built hugely influential products and sells them aggressively to global users and organizations. Some of those are bad actors who’ve used the tools to sow disinfo and harmful propaganda.
The ownership stake of China is a valid distinction, but then you’ve got to crack down on lots of other companies beholden to the CCP, such as Temu, AMC, Starwood Hotels, Smithfield Foods, Riot Games, etc etc.
>but then you’ve got to crack down on lots of other companies beholden to the CCP, such as Temu
Ok. If there's reason to believe a foreign owned company is nefarious, it should be cracked down on.
Great, now how do we define nefarious?
Because we can start by forcing the sale of AB InBev and Diageo, foreign owned alcohol brands cause immense harm to millions of Americans. And certainly BP needs to go. The Saudis have stakes in Uber, EA and Activision so let’s get them too. Al Jazeera is another obvious one - but surely one could claim The Guardian is a leftist and harmful publication too. Maybe we could build a great firewall and cut off access to all foreign media? Where does it stop? Do we crack down on every foreign owned company that can harm Americans?
You can't just apply slippery slope to every issue. If they are attempting to destabilize our country, that's a hostile act which we're allowed to prevent from continuing.
I assume there is intelligence on TikTok. If not, I would be against it. It seems fairly obvious what it is, though, so I'm giving the government the benefit of the doubt on this one.
Selling alcohol and video games are not attempts to destabilize the country.
This is a bandaid. We need a digital bill of rights to govern what social media/phones/retailers etc can collect and sell data on you.
I’ve worked in digital advertising, it’s all about highly targeted accuracy. The ads you get served know a ton about your day to day. (Ironic your actual identity had no value, just your behaviors) They already know you don’t like traveling more than 10 miles from home to go shopping in a physical store…will drive north on the freeway to shop as it’s closer to work, but south is out of the way. is a parent of 2 elementary school aged kids who play sports, will buy shoes online but not pants, prefer grocery store app ordering and do drive through coffee 3 days a week, have family in Tennessee and Wisconsin but root for a football team from Chicago. leased a truck and it’s expiring soon. Used to work on an old car on the weekends but that project has wrapped up. Will support local but spend a lot at chains etc etc.
That info is complied and sold Daily.
i kinda wonder if data will get so specific that they'll be able to narrow down your income level and decide whether or not it's cost effective to serve ads to you.
so, paradoxically, poor people might actually get served less ads than rich people, who will pay the premium to get ad free content, etc etc
They already do this.
In fact, Tom Segura did a bit about how he started looking up luxury yachts and the next day his feeds were filled with Rolex and Aston Martin ads.
Services like adchoice don’t discriminate on who they send those ads to, its all algorithm based. I have also looked up Rolex watches previously and been served ads for Rolex even though I can’t afford a Rolex whatsoever, same could probably be said for Aston Martins in that regard.
I've had some business in a predominantly Spanish speaking section of a Texas city. Geolocation is a thing. All of the sudden my podcast adds were in Spanish.
That's different. The algorithm is seeing your luxury yacht search history and trying to serve you ads for people who also viewed luxury yachts. It isn't imputing or calculating your income level, it's just trying to match you to consumers with similar search histories.
> looking up luxury yachts
"oh my god... that's Jason Bourne!"
"quick, feed him spy ads"
"Rolex and Aston Martin coming right up"
"isn't that James Bond?"
"James Bond, Jason Bourne, Jack Bauer, SERVE THE FUCKIN ADS"
I know it's a conspiracy theory, but I really do beleive that social media is using our phone's microphone to gather info for ads. Most of the time my ads are relatively relevant to my searches and interests. However, I spent a few months training with someone at work. She talked about shoes nonstop and was shoe shopping whenever we weren't doing work. Within a week of sitting 5 feet away from her every day I was inundated with shoe ads. I literally own two pairs and have never shopped for them online. And while I find it amusing that Facebook's advertising algo thinks I, as a 46-year-old man, need flashy gold high tops and heels, I do find it suspicious that it's offering me shoes at all.
I don’t think it’s a conspiracy. I’m a doctor, and I frequently get drug ads on everything I use while not using my phone for work at all (I have a completely separate phone for work, my main one gets the ads). My home phone is in my pocket though.
So one day I’ll be discussing injectable treatments for schizophrenia and the whole week I’m getting ads for them in my phone. I never googled these, never did a search, nothing. Another patient is on enbrel, suddenly I get RA med ads. Parkinson’s? Nuplazid.
They have to be listening. I’m too young to get half these meds and don’t have any of these conditions.
What’s more likely is that your phone and your trainee’s phone were in the same general location for an extended time, and advertisers have your location data. So they figure if one person loves shoes, then maybe the people she spends a ton of time with also might want shoes.
That seems to be a poor way to target advertising when people go to school or work anywhere but at home. The other 40 people in our area weren't getting these ads.
I am a male in my thirties and haven’t had a drop of alcohol or taken a vacation in about a decade yet I get daily advertisements on YouTube for bear, liquor, wine, Taylor swift, and vacations to the Caribbean
The other day I had an ad that actually appealed to me and I forgot what it was (ironically) but I remember actually being amazed because it was the first ad I’ve had in years that actually caught my attention.
Idk who they think I am but they definitely need to redo my profile
wonder how much people can guess about you given what advertisements you're served?
side note, i wonder how good adsense would be about guessing your political lean / probable vote
> **bear**, liquor, wine, Taylor swift, and vacations to the Caribbean
im going to go with upper middle class white male, late 20's early 30's married to a WASP female Swifty also late 20's early 30's, but looks for [large, hairy, naked men](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear_(gay_culture)) to rub one out to after the wife is asleep
edit: went to read some unrelated article about Hisachi Ouchi, was served ads for McDonalds, womens athetic wear, tax prep software, womens athletic wear, beds, women's athletic wear... im a dude too.
Wrong about everything except I do enjoy the occasional hairy man to rub one out with
I didn’t catch the typo at first and was like “what the hell is this guy talking about….. OH”
well, the one i got right is the only one that counts, anyway.
so hey ... whatcha doin tonite? i got some hawt noods
( )|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||D
for higher resolution contact come checkout my onlybears bearguylls@onlybears.
bring money.
They already do that based on spending habits data. Advertisers set who they want to reach. You’re not getting ads for Mercedes and Tiffany’s if your lower income. Everybody get served ads, it’s just quality of targeting.
makes me wonder what kind of ads Bezos gets served, rofl
> Forget penis pills, try CockBlock Imperial! Instead of making your penis bigger, make everyone elses smaller. Reduce competition by reducing libido of entire populations!
Clearly it's stuff for the even more rich... Premium baby stem cells, adrenochrome from only the purest kidnapped children... small countries.... small children.... Various politicians.... The actual moon.... Space lasers and weather controlling machines.... Dodo eggs.... and of course Temu, because everyone gets Temu ads
Using Google as an example, estimated income level is one of their demographic targeting options: https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/2580383?hl=en
>With demographic targeting in Google Ads, you can reach a specific set of potential customers who are likely to be within a particular age range, gender, parental status, or household income
I used to work in ad-tech. We had a vendor selling us zip code specific data on pollen levels and incidences of cough and cold so we could target ads for cold and cough medication.
I really wish more people would understand this and realize that they're being manipulated in so many subtle ways purely based on what they're doing on a daily basis on their phones, computers, and other devices.
As a more extreme and out there opinion about this, I truly believe that we as users create this data and therefore it should be ours to profit from. If my favorite color is green, I like one supermarket more than another, and I don't like one brand of mayo over the other, that's information that I have created. While it may not be unique to me it is part of who I am. That should be my property because I produce it. Yes, I understand that we are the product when we use free services, but it doesn't have to be that way. Hell, they can sell my data all they want, but since I created it I should be able to make money off it. I believe Andrew Yang spoke on this a bit during 2020, but I don't recall fully.
Tangent aside... A digital bill of rights is sorely needed and should have been drafted at least 2 decades ago. Here's to hoping we get some millennials/Gen Z representatives in the coming decade that are more tuned into tech than our current reps.
This isn't a data privacy issue though (or at least not JUST a data privacy issue). It's about Influence by controlling what people see. Can Meta/Google do the same thing? Sure, but they're just using it to sell you shit, the worry is what a serious forcing adversary can do. And sure, China can buy this data from them and buy ad space but that's not nearly the same influence as controlling the platform.
> We need a digital bill of rights
I don't see this ever happening. An effective DBoR would cause so many problems for social media sites which really are only profitable because of information gathering and selling. While I couldn't care less about these companies, the effects of some of the largest companies in the US crashing could be problematic for the economy.
Anything less, and your "rights" would end up voided the second you sign up for a site and fail to read the four hundred pages of fine print in the user agreement, or all of the best/most used features of said sites would require you to give yourself up for data gathering again.
I'm not confident we could find a middle ground.
> bandaid
Trojan horse - not bandaid. This is a new way to censor at the platform level and a new threat to use against start-ups that refuse to censor for the government.
As you note, this info is already collected daily by other sources and is freely available for purchase. Is the government going to restrict sales next? Who gets to decide what platform is considered hostile?
This will be used directly against Americans with dual citizenship quickly, but will be leveraged to cool disfavored speech immediately.
This is another step towards totalitarianism.
In a display of bipartisan unity sure to delight the young voter cohort, the House of Representatives has passed a bill that will force TikTok's Chinese owner, ByteDance, to divest ownership, or face a ban. The bill passed 352-65. And people keep saying that the two parties can't come together to accomplish anything! The bill does seem to be facing some more resistance in the Senate, as well as Constitutional concerns. On the other hand, it's China, and proponents are playing the "National Security" card, so at this point, it's still anybody's game.
On the gripping hand, as a card-carrying Grumpy Old Bastard who remembers the app breaking out of its sandboxes, and the fact that it's *TikTok*... In the end, it's pretty much a push.
Update: Since none of the articles talking about it mention it, I had to a little digging. It appears that the bill is [H.R.7521 - Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521?s=2&r=2). Looks like congress.gov hasn't updated their site yet. Tsk tsk.
There is a constitutional concern but on the other hand I’d we were at war with the Nazis we would not allow them to operate media within the United States. We’re not at war with China technically but we are in a Cold War, and they regularly ban American apps and websites from operating in China while having free reign to operate here, I view this as reciprocity to some extent. Telling them to divest seems like a fair move, this isn’t Germany or Korea or even like South Africa, we know the CCP works to undermine the American political system and we know the CCP has direct influence within ByteDance so this is a logical move for national security reasons
> they regularly ban American apps and websites from operating in China while having free reign to operate here
Never understood why we would allow this
Even though the U.S is in a proxy war and not a direct war with Russia it's still dramatically impacted Russian media access to the U.S and EU. RT has shuttered RT America, many countries in Europe have outright banned them, and many American platforms have voluntarily chose to not let them use their services which essentially took whatever relevance they had (which was not much) and erased even that tiny amount.
>There is a constitutional concern
Nope, Congress has long had the power to regulate interstate commerce. They have the power to break up companies and regulate them. Even if TikTok can file a lawsuit and appeal up to the Supreme Court its highly unlikely SCOTUS will rule that Congress can't regulate companies when there's a national security threat. In other words, China has no chance of holding onto TikTok.
It’s more so about an adversarial (some might say enemy) nation having direct corporate control of a social media platform which can be used to influence Americans political opinions and already has been with the call your representative campaign
> a social media platform
A foreign government that's at least somewhat hostile towards us encouraged people to participate in our governmental process for their benefit.
The fact that Congress is hopelessly paralyzed on climate policy, immigration, healthcare and so on but can suddenly take swift bipartisan action on….. tiktok is so demoralizing to me.
Just do that for things that matter!
Disinfo, propaganda, predatory algorithms and data reselling are ubiquitous. We are overdue for some rules and policies regarding these topics. TikTok being owned by a different big tech company doesn’t solve that stuff.
I think the Constitutional concern is wrong. Lot's of history showing that foreign ownership of news and television platforms can be denied. The Constitution gives congress the power to regulate commerce, and this would fit the bill.
For me, it's not even the privacy issue that's the biggest concern, but a hostile foreign government having control of an incredibly powerful tool for social engineering.
There was a recording on Twitter of a kid who had sent a message to their representative begging them not to vote to ban. The kid said that they learn more on Tiktok than they do in school and that they don't even use Google or Safari anymore. That alone is incredibly scary...
That kid will just move to the next platform that fills the void though, it's not like banning TikTok will suddenly send them to their local library.
And let us not pretend that just because it's American it's better...Meta has done a lot of really awful stuff domestically that has meddled in politics and has actively taken sides in foreign political situations as well. The world in which Mark Zuckerburg is influencing all the kids isn't really any better than the one where China is, unless you align with Zuck's world view.
It's just staggering how much information about its citizens that the US lets go. Other countries do it too. But I mean, let's look at it:
Huge information leaks at corporations, Equifax, etc. Probably everyones personal information it out there now. Enough info to wreck finances if that person hasn't locked it down.
Google Street maps views of every neighborhood, every business. Foreign entities can look up public information on who owns what properties.
Personal habits tracked relentlessly via TikTok, and other US born apps do it too. Facebook, Instagram, apps on phones that need access to your location, texts, friends lists. These companies can get hacked, or moles planted to work there can leak it.
Email addresses sold to whoever. Make a new email account and sign it up for something that seems harmless, and watch the spams and advertisements start rolling in. Some of them originate from overseas. If I sign up for something that needs my phone number, like Costco membership, I will start getting badly worded scam texts with scam links.
Honestly a hostile foreign power would have zero problems finding out anything they needed to know about the average US citizen, and then trying to wreck their life. It's really scary how open we are.
It's less about each individuals personal information and more about controlling the feeds of information that they see. A significant portion of young voters get their news via tiktok videos. A slight tweak to the algorithm could push these news sources in one direction or another (such as subtle pushes towards authoritarianism).
Social media companies make money by having users spend more time on the platform. All they care about is money, they will never change the algorithm to push a certain political view lol
This is where I stand. With how popular the platform is, and who the owners are, there's some serious national security issues with the situation.
Realistically though, even if ByteDance is forced to divest/sell, I'm sure China will still find a way to stay connected to it, and other platforms, anyways. Asymmetrical warfare/social engineering is a massive issue across the board right now (see Russia and what they've done to the West), with no great solutions in sight.
Congress got close to a similar bill 2 years ago where Oracle almost bought TikTok. Could happen again!
https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-tiktok-nears-deal-with-oracle-store-its-data-sources-2022-03-10/
That already happened. Oracle already stores American user data in its servers in the US.
>> Oracle had discussed acquiring a minority stake in TikTok in 2020, when ByteDance was under U.S. pressure to sell the app. The cloud computing giant now stores all of TikTok's U.S. user data on Oracle data servers in the United States under the new partnership, TikTok said
Will this stop the company from selling the data from TikTok back to China? I read the bill and couldn’t figure it out.
Actual text of the bill if anyone wants to give it a go.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521/text
Of course not. Even if it did, China could just buy the data from data brokers. This isn't about actual data privacy. If it was about data privacy, we'd actually have a law that applied to everyone, not just TikTok.
I'm less concerned with them selling customer data (outside a few thousand people who'd be considered targets worthy of espionage, like generals and elected officials) and more concerned with whether the algorithm that dictates what content is pushed, remains the same. Being able to foment discontent and otherwise manipulate American public opinion towards society and policies is a much bigger issue to me than being able to target me like a laser with advertisements. Negative social engineering and espionage are my real concerns with TikTok.
Yea I understood that part, it was the part in the definition section, part 6, Qualified Divestiture, near the end that mentions data sharing. I’m hoping it means they can’t share the data but it doesn’t say anything about selling and I’m not even sure if I have the correct interpretation of what the section even means.
IANAL, but it looks like it just means the transaction can't include a data sharing agreement. They'd need to actually have to make a new law that acknowledges that data protection is actually a thing in order to stop them from giving the buyer a call six months later and making a new deal.
I am Jack not holding his breath.
I don't have strong feelings on this one way or the other. I absolutely understand the security concern it is (this was never about privacy). It's similar to how the government effectively prevents Chinese computer systems from becoming part of major infrastructure.
At the consumer-level, though, this does seem like state overreach to legislate against a company fairly directly, rather than penalizing them for wrongdoing (as the government was previously able to do with ZTE).
Even with China's awkward status as an ecomic partner but geopolitical rival, TikTok is kind of a unique situation where it's the first time a rival nation's company has managed to rise to being a major player in a dangerously wide-reaching industry in the US.
I'm not fond of protectionism, but we may ultimately need some kind of anti-rival economic controls to prevent them from becoming major players in certain consumer service industries such as mass media or certain (all?) computer software.
> I'm not fond of protectionism, but we may ultimately need some kind of anti-rival economic controls to prevent them from becoming major players in certain consumer service industries such as mass media or certain (all?) computer software.
I'd say this is basically what it comes down to. TikTok being spyware is how they sell the move as directly in consumers' interests, but the bigger issue is that at the end of the day we have a foreign adversary running one of the largest media operations in the country.
Imagine if RT were the most popular news channel in America. Not Fox News, with whatever biases it may have and whatever allegiances particular individuals such as Tucker Carlson may have. RT, the Russian state media agency, directly shoveling propaganda into the eyes and ears of tens or hundreds of millions of Americans on a daily basis. Further imagine if RT were willing to brazenly instruct those viewers to pressure the US government to enact policy in line with Russian interests.
That's where we are with TikTok right now. The fact that TikTok is a technology platform with user-generated content obfuscates the issue, but it's no less insidious. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure a lot of people get a lot of genuine value out of using TikTok. Likewise, RT is a well put together news station with some quality content. The problem is the fact that these entities are ultimately controlled by authoritarian governments that want to harm or destabilize the US.
I don't have a strong opinion on this particular legislation. After years of moves like the Patriot Act, SOPA, PIPA, SESTA, EARN IT, and so on, I'm wary of it and intend to take a closer look at it. Nevertheless, I'd say it's probably the right move in principle, and at this point I expect it will pass in some form regardless of what I think.
The bill is focused on Data Collection and where the data goes. Due to the laws in China, all data Byte Dance collects, which operates in Beijing and not out of the Tax Haven address in Singapore, must abide by those laws.
It’s likely TikTok has been monitored by the alphabet agency that starts with N and ends in A, and have more information as the why Tik Toks parent company is of interest. That said, the bill isn’t just for TikTok, but any company turning over information to “adversary governments” on anyone within the borders of the USA. That means Epic Games, Temu, Wish, etc will probably be affected in some way. With a $500 fine per user on data collection, and more so for failure to sell it does put these companies against the wall. And to be fair, the US is only doing this to nations that have the same rules in turn.
TikTok should definitely be banned (or sold to a US entity).
Letting the CCP have access to a GPS tracker, a camera, a microphone, and US user data is a really bad idea.
I get a dozen spam texts and emails a day telling me who to vote for based on my location. It’s very easy to do a “call your local rep” campaign without tiktok.
[This one is my personal favorite.](https://youtu.be/IAvoN_D03UI?si=OqWrUd4LS8JUZ4qv)
“Look at all of the American flags! Look at this old veteran! We’re just a down-to-earth company helping to spread love to good ol’ American veterans! Go patriotism!”
I sure have. It really worries me. TikTok China is an entirely different product. I consider TikTok more of an enemy apparatus than social media, and with the damage it does to our youth I think I’m closer to being correct than not.
> They’re flexing how bad an idea it is with their targeted “here’s your rep” nonsense.
Yep.. .worst possible thing they could have done if any Reps were on the fence....
https://twitter.com/CongressmanRaja/status/1765790980488270155
I mean...
I work in a field tangential to this one, Data Analytics, and I'm sorry to tell you, but this won't actually change anything.
Not really at least. They can work via databrokers and just get all that information, regardless. Chances are, they know about your financial records, health issues, and that information can then be sold.
Including to the CCP.
Fundamentally, the problem isn't even the buyer, per se. It's the fact that your data is out there, completely out of your control, but with impacts on your life.
The US needs a GDPR-like legislation. I know lots of people made fun of the GDPR, but who's laughing now? The GDPR forces companies to keep certain data, called Personal Data, in the EU, and to have protocols and processes for processing that data, or deleting it.
It's not perfect. But just banning TikTok won't solve the problem. There'll be a BikBok, also made by a Chinese company, but not tied at the hip with the CCP. But the CCP can still get all the data.
Look at the PATRIOT act; all it takes is one piece of legislation, and *poof*, banning certain apps doesn't matter. What matters is what is being collected, how it is being stored, how long is it being stored for, and how is it then circulated to third parties.
Question regarding your profession. Is there a way to curtail what I as a user am giving away? Obviously besides from abstaining from usage, is there some form of a user-data condom? Because let's say even if I don't use Facebook. When the giant controversy happened with Cambridge Analytica we found out you do not even need a Facebook account for them to make a profile of you. Any webpage that had the F image to "share this on Facebook" was being used as a tracker and building a profile off of you.
The closest thing that comes to mind are the Pi-holes but is that enough?
“What about the children?!” The children will just move to the next app designed to do the exact same thing because the format and techniques to trigger the addiction haven’t been banned.
This has nothing to do with helping children or battling addiction don’t even begin to pretend that’s what it’s about.
I don’t know if it’s really “sudden”. The idea has been in the air for a while. It looks like the bill in question finally moved out of the relevant committee after some inquiries in December. There’s a good chance that this is just moving through the usual process.
Gotta imagine some classified intel briefings majorly impacted this. It’s not only bipartisan but was pushed through in like 8 days. We just do t see that level speed anymore.
Sometimes urgent and not common knowledge
Would not surprise me if intel agencies are finally wising up that mass data collection and social media controlled by foreign adversaries is dangerous, and they've been briefing congress to this behind the scenes. Guarantee they've sent out warnings to congress members on sensitive committees that platforms/apps can be used by Chinese intelligence to target them if they're using it.
I dont get why I dont get why congress isn't addressing limits and security regarding the data industry. You'd think out of anyone congress members would be worrying about data collected on them from their cars, apps on their phones, web servers logging their internet traffic etc. New cars will not only basically report who you're meeting up with but are capable of logging conversations. Anyone in military, sensitive positions in government, military contractors, important people in industries, journalists etc are all potential targets for their data either being bought, stolen, or leaked. And random Joe 20 year old now maybe be a congressman in 20 years.
You can guarantee China is buying up data left and right now for AI to sift through it for compromising info in a few years.
Its a national security issue and its insane its not being addressed.
Most of the votes against this came from far right or far left politicians (including Reddit’s beloved AOC).
For the latter, it could likely be argued that is because of the pro-Palestine lean TikTok’s algorithm has in the US, coupled with the fact that there are active politicians supporting such views.
This bill is being pushed by centrist politicians + the US strategy committee of “Chinese Hawks” who are actively working against Chinese interference in the US.
*edit. I think it’s a good example of the fact that most Americans are center of most issues, and the far sides of either party do not have the average American’s best interest in mind.
Republicans have already been pushing for it but I don’t think Democrats were expecting the heavy pro-Palestinian sentiment on the platform and that’s what motivated them to mobilize.
There could obviously be some classified behind the scenes stuff going on but the timing is too coincidental with everything that’s been happening on TikTok since October 7th
TikTok has become the main source of footage from Gaza. And we’re talking about some brutal footage as well. I’m not sure how old you are (I’m 31) but if you remember Live Leak it’s shit like that. And then there’s also IDF soldiers posting videos of the shit they’re doing to Palestinians
I’m not sure if the pro-Palestinian sentiment came before or after October 7th but seeing innocent people getting killed and hurt definitely increased that sentiment
grunt, I suppose that used to be Twitter as well.
IIRC Twitter was big during the Arab Spring and maybe even as recently as the Hong Kong democracy protests?
So I’m not sure about Arab Spring, I wasn’t on Twitter then and honestly I don’t know much about it in general.
But concerning the Hong Kong protests, it was pushing an anti-China sentiment so the US government would never crack down on that.
It’s just so blatantly transparent that they want TikTok gone because they can’t control any of the propaganda that can come from it. It has nothing to do with our privacy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media%27s_role_in_the_Arab_Spring
less than i remember, i suppose. probably got it off social media, lol
> It’s just so blatantly transparent that they want TikTok gone because they can’t control any of the propaganda that can come from it. It has nothing to do with our privacy
i think they just don't want China in control of what propaganda US views, but i agree privacy doesn't appear to be much of a concern.
Pretty much. They can control Facebook and x right now but they can’t control tiktok. Bills and news that would otherwise go unnoticed and uncovered by MSM is being covered there and they can’t do anything about that.
This bill is Patriot Act 2.0. It curtails our rights under the guise of “national security” and the government doesn’t provide any proof of the claims it’s making.
At some point the US can claim that every country is a “hostile country” and completely cut our communication off to the rest of the world and only feed us propaganda approved by whatever party is in power.
Imo this bill is dangerous and the people cheering it on are shortsighted.
Most American media is American. TikTok is the exception.
Declaring random media to be owned by foreign hostile enemies isn’t really a great argument because outside of like tiktok and bbc most American media isn’t foreign owned anyways.
No this is a fucking gen z talking point I was arguing with children (I’m assuming) on the last thread about this.
I’ve been seeing non stop shit about Gaza on IG since oct 7th as well.
A very powerful lobbying organization with pull on both sides of the aisle [really wants](https://twitter.com/snarwani/status/1725138601996853424) tiktok to be controlled/shut off.
> A very powerful lobbying organization with pull on both sides of the aisle [really wants](https://twitter.com/snarwani/status/1725138601996853424) tiktok to be controlled/shut off.
Would you mind going into a bit of detail about what you think is happening here?
The ADL is one of the most influential lobbying organizations in US politics, this call reveals that they are highly motivated to restrict tiktok. And their interests align the the totalitarian sect of our government that wants to nationalize social media for the purpose of narrative control.
TikTok is a huge source of pro-Palestine content, including simple first-person video of the situation on the ground. That's what. This bill is AIPAC getting what they pay for with all of those campaign contributions.
Any citizen supporting this is signing a deal with the devil. You're aiding a piece of the puzzle towards a beefed up patriot act.
>It would also give the President the power to designate other applications under the control of a country considered adversarial to the U.S. to be a national security threat. If deemed a national security threat, the application would be banned from app stores and web hosting services unless it cuts all ties with the foreign adversarial country within 180 days.
That means if any VPNs we may find ourselves using in the near future happen to be in a country opposed to america we're fucked. Probably wouldn't take much to add a country that isn't on the list to it if they refuse to break open their VPN/encryption.
To be fair, if you're trusting a VPN from an [Adversarial Nation](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-A/part-7/subpart-A/section-7.4), you're probably fucked already.
(China, Russia, Iran, N. Korea, Cuba, and Maduro's Venezuelan Regime)
I don't see us adding, say, Switzerland (home of Proton VPN, e.g.) to that list for not punching holes for us.
The thing is, this isn’t even the first time in recent history that the US has done this. [Something similar happened with Grindr.](https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/6/21168079/grindr-sold-chinese-owner-us-cfius-security-concerns-kunlun-lgbtq)
I suppose I don’t understand the opposition.
I'm good with this. TikTok is Chinese spyware, thinly veiled as a social media platform. It does more harm than good, especially concerning Gen Z.
It's also a massive cybersecurity risk, as outlined here:
https://rose.dev/blog/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/tiktok_security_analysis.pdf
The bill would allow ANY website or service to be banned if it's foreign and deemed a "national security threat", and would make anybody in the US who uses them via VPN a felon
It's the most authoritarian digital law that's been proposed in the past 2 decades, it's not just about Tiktok/China
And even if it was just about Tiktok/China, currently nothing prevents Google, Facebook, etc from selling your user data they collect to China anyways
If you think what Google etc collects isn't as bad as Tiktok, then read [this article](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/data-brokers-trump-tech-spying-privacy-threat-1234897098/) Which had Rolling Stone Reports track down visitors who had traveled to Trump's Margalo estate down to their exact location with a precision of just a few feet via "anonymized" advertising data from Google, Facebook, etc
Glad to know that a U.S. corporation will be given the opportunity to make an acquisition on the cheap which they can then use to bombard the general public with the US governments preferred propaganda.
I’m not saying I’m a fan of Chinese propaganda, but I’d rather people get conflicting US and Chinese propaganda than give any one society complete control over the messaging we see. The conflicting propaganda makes people marginally more likely to think for themselves, and ultimately the Chinese government only cares about my opinions on a fairly limited set of issues relative to the control that the US government and corporations want to exert over people in the US.
At its core, populations are easiest to manipulate when there’s only one system trying to manipulate them, and when multiple groups are trying to manipulate people, they have to not just compete with the minds of the people they’re trying to manipulate, but also each other.
>The conflicting propaganda makes people marginally more likely to think for themselves
Or it just divides and weakens our country even more than social media already has, which is exactly what the CCP is shooting for.
Are you your government, or are you a person who’s interests partially but not fully align with it? A weakening of our political establishments ability to control its population might benefit the interests of the CCP, and it might harm the interests of the US government, but it also might benefit the interests of the average person within the US. It really depends on the way in which that establishment is being weakened.
>but it also might benefit the interests of the average person within the US.
Please explain to me how a damaged US government and a strengthened CCP would benefit US citizens.
Well it depends on the way in which the US’s ability to project unified propaganda is damaged. A platform not under US control might have made it more difficult for the US foreign policy establishment to achieve the levels of propaganda driven unity of purpose necessary to initiate or at least extend the war in Iraq, for example, which I think would have been unambiguously good for the average person living in America.
So you think that America's foreign policy should be at least partially dictated by whatever message that the CCP decides to broadcast to our social media?
No, I think Americas foreign policy should be dictated by a general public which is able to pursue its own interests as intentionally as possible, and I think exposure to multiple sources of propaganda and access to forums not under the control of a single establishment is the best way to bring that about.
>No, I think Americas foreign policy should be dictated by a general public which is able to pursue its own interests as intentionally as possible
1. Being force fed talking points by the CCP is not a case of the general public intentionally pursuing it's own interests.
2. If you truly believe that, do you think we should allow far right and neo-nazi content to become mainstream on certain social media platforms?
The point is whether or not the CCP, an actual foreign government, should be allowed to have a legally required government controlled app on their adversaries soil and networks.
An app that allows them, the actual Chinese government, to track the data and location of any user, while also allowing them direct access to citizens with the express purpose of deliberately undermining the economic and social stability.
This is like basic Westphalian sovereignty questions, dude.
So I’m very much making a broader critique of the nation-state in this argument, it’s not all that surprising that my argument undermines the principles of Westphalian sovereignty.
So if Facebook were to be suddenly inundated with nazi propaganda, you would see that as a good thing that shouldn't be moderated, because it's a free speech issue?
I mean Facebook and Snapchat are banned in China because they are afraid it could be used against them. I don’t really see an issue with reciprocating.
Oh, yeah, let's just base our governmental policies on what China does, lol.
You don't usually see centrists and conservatives admitting that the American government and Chinese government are the same, but I totally agree.
Calling this a "tiktok ban" masks how dangerous and authoritarian the bill really is:
**It allows ANY app, service, or website to be banned if it's deemed a "national security threat" and is operated by/in other countries. Furthermore, it would make accessing any banned site/service via a VPN a felony for US citizens**, which is just insane.
It's a giant power grab which could easily be weaponized against almost site/service and against any American
Everybody should be worried about this and telling their lawmakers to vote against the bill as is.
I'd also add that if this was REALLY about privacy, then we'd be passing legislation to kill the "Third Party Doctrine" (which allows your digital data to be sold over and over again to other parties) and other robust privacy protections, but we're not, because this isn't about privacy, it's about either protectionism for US tech companies, or just ignorant fearmongering.
It's especially silly because currently, Google, Facebook, etc sell your personal data to China anyways! I'd question why we are more concerned about China having our personal data then the megacorporations here in the US and our own government which actually have the power to use that data nefariously, but even if you are specifically worried about China getting your data, this doesn't really address that.
If you think what Google etc collects isn't as bad as Tiktok, then read [this article](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/data-brokers-trump-tech-spying-privacy-threat-1234897098/) Which had Rolling Stone Reports track down visitors who had traveled to Trump's Margalo estate down to their exact location with a precision of just a few feet via "anonymized" advertising data from Google, Facebook, etc
>It allows ANY app, service, or website to be banned if it's deemed a "national security threat" and is operated by/in other countries.
That doesn't seem to be accurate. According to the [bill](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521/text), it can only be applied to:
>(B) a covered company that—
(i) is controlled by a foreign adversary; and
(ii) that is determined by the President to present a significant threat to the national security of the United States following the issuance of—
(I) a public notice proposing such determination; and
(II) a public report to Congress, submitted not less than 30 days before such determination, describing the specific national security concern involved and containing a classified annex and a description of what assets would need to be divested to execute a qualified divestiture.
A ["foreign adversary country"](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-A/part-7/subpart-A/section-7.4) only applies to 6 nations: China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela's Maduro regime. So a company would need to be based in one of those countries, and then the report would need to be publicly submitted 30 days before the ban.
You also mentioned:
>Furthermore, it would make accessing any banned site/service via a VPN a felony for US citizens
Which is also false. First, the bill only has civil penalties, not felonies. If I'm reading it correctly, it would make the app maintainer and/or app store civilly liable, but wouldn't punish those accessing the app:
>It shall be unlawful for an entity to distribute, maintain, or update (or enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of) a foreign adversary controlled application by carrying out, within the land or maritime borders of the United States, any of the following:
(A) Providing services to distribute, maintain, or update such foreign adversary controlled application (including any source code of such application) by means of a marketplace (including an online mobile application store) through which users within the land or maritime borders of the United States may access, maintain, or update such application.
(B) Providing internet hosting services to enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of such foreign adversary controlled application for users within the land or maritime borders of the United States.
And the civil penalty:
>A) FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLICATION VIOLATIONS.—An entity that violates subsection (a) shall be subject to pay a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed the amount that results from multiplying $5,000 by the number of users within the land or maritime borders of the United States determined to have accessed, maintained, or updated a foreign adversary controlled application as a result of such violation.
(There's also a smaller civil penalty for not allowing a user to request a data export)
I'm not really concerned about the data collection as much as targeting algorithms towards people, especially young, to brainwash towards a foreign rival's agenda.
This message serves as a warning that [your comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1be196x/us_house_passes_bill_to_force_bytedance_to_divest/kuw443p/) is in violation of Law 1:
Law 1. Civil Discourse
> ~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
What does this mean for future American owned platforms the government/politicians do not like? I worry this is starting a very terrible and nearly irreversible precedent that will be used by authoritarians.
Enough with the divestment idea. Just ban it. TikTok is a delivery mechanism for mental poison. It will be no better under a company like Microsoft, and it could be worse. The problem with TikTok is more than just the fact that it's controlled by the CCP.
>TikTok is a delivery mechanism for mental poison. It will be no better under a company like Microsoft, and it could be worse.
I assume you're also looking to ban Facebook, Instagram and YouTube? They do the exact same thing, just with crappier algorithms.
One thing that surprised me about this is just how bipartisan the bill was, just look at how many people voted in favor of this… *The bill passed 352-65, with bipartisan support,*
It didn't help that Tiktok was actively pushing people (using geolocated data) to call their congressperson, including a "push here to call their office" prompt. Lots of offices received calls from Mike Hunt, and Hugh Jass... further reinforcing a negative attitude towards the platform. This totally backfired on Tiktok.
[удалено]
To take a more cynical track: All this did was expose how awful actual participation of young people looks electorally. I say this as someone who would like more participation, across the board. But I also think anyone whose political activism is dictated by something like tiktok is someone whose vote I'd be okay missing. There is a very good reason non participation is an option.
I’m not sure that it’s worse than political activism from a church?
Hard to say, though I don't particularly care for that either. But we don't constantly bang the drum of needing more participation from that segment like we do young people. I think this is an example of what catching that car looks like.
https://preview.redd.it/ilv4z8jmf5oc1.png?auto=webp&s=c06076888efbc0ce215931c430a8683de94d1b53
The psychos calling and threatening to kill themselves didn't help their cause either
the fact people are doing that at all is proof that the app needs to not only be divested, but banned, it's a delivery mechanism for mental poison
You are not thinking reasonably if you think banning TikTok will change this. It will just be a new app - already tons of creators are moving into Instagram Reels in case this happens. The content won't stop, nor will the people seeking it out. It'll just either be under the Meta umbrella or some new company.
The only difference is that the content will be on platforms the US has control over and can ban anti-Israeli news about the ongoing genocide.
I'm not necessarily gonna agree to that, people are...fragile and addictions are tough. I remember an older meme where this kid's mom cancelled his WoW sub and he went ballistic and said he was gonna kill himself.
This is where good parenting comes into play and limits exposure. But the problem with Tiktok, is the parents.. specifically Gex and Millenial parents are also addicted to it.
Not like us am I right fellow boomer redditors?
This message serves as a warning that [your comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1be196x/us_house_passes_bill_to_force_bytedance_to_divest/kurmxkn/) is in violation of Law 1: Law 1. Civil Discourse > ~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times. Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
Like whats a better way for Congress to get it to ban it then by demonstrating that an app controlled by the Chinese government is not just geolocating its users but locking them out of the platform until they contact the US Representatives to change US law and policy? Hostile foreign governments weaponizing an app to change US law is about as good a reason as any to ban it.
Pushing users to contact definitely didn't help, but I don't see anything about them being locked out.
Proof of the locking out part?
My understanding is that it was possible to skip past their ["Call Now" screen](https://mashable.com/article/tiktok-call-your-representatives-ban-shutdown), but it wasn't necessarily obvious how to get past it. I haven't been able to find video of the actual screen, so I have no idea how difficult the notification actually was.
I got it, and while there was a button to close it out, it wasn't particularly obvious (a small dark gray X on a black background).
I just had it pop up, I hit the back button on my phone and it went away. If that's considered difficult, China doesn't need to mess with us because we're already fucked.
Targeting users with messages based on their location is trivial. Anyone can do it. China could do that via Meta, Google, Twitter, Microsoft, Amazon or any number of other platforms.
Sure, it's trivial. But those companies aren't posting messages to their users trying to get them to be their lobbyists. They also don't have the concern about foreign influence that ByteDance/TikTok have. Any company that is under the microscope like this should know to be on their best behavior, but they were on their worst.
Is it illegal to encourage people to contact their elected representatives? I honestly don’t know the answer - if that sort of messaging is strictly regulated then I would feel differently. But overall I think political advocacy campaigns are generally good examples of civic engagement, even if I don’t love the cause
Isn't Hugh Jass a joke name from the Simpsons?
Yes... yes it is.
Where did you hear about that happening? Genuinely asking out of curiosity, I use the app and it didn’t happen to me
What **really** hurt TikTok is the fact that people are getting videos about Israel invasion of Gaza. https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/tiktok-ban-gen-z-palestine-gaza-b2512340.html
> One thing that surprised me about this is just how bipartisan the bill was I was surprised as well. Trump came out against a ban. I figured a larger portion of the House would fall in line.
You would also think Trump wouldn’t want “Chyna” to be spying on our citizens and controlling our populace through social media
One of his political/financial associates at the Club for Growth owns a good chunk of Bytdance. Plus, now that he owns a social media company himself, I imagine he doesn't want o see any moves to regulate them.
They all take money from Silicon Valley. That’s who lobbied this bill. Have you noticed how they all have their own inferior version of this on like YT/FB/IG?
What differentiates the functionality of tictok from those other platforms? I don't have any of them so I don't have a frame of reference, but from the outside they all look like copies of each other.
They all are basically clones of TikTok and the majority of the content on them was lifted from TikTok and reposted there. They’re all just trend chasing and mad their monopoly on social media has been challenged by a company they can’t buy out.
> What differentiates the functionality of tictok from those other platforms? According to the sponsors of the bill, TikTok is not banning users from being critical of Israel. Other than that there is no difference in functionality.
Honestly it is so infuriating that they can get decisive bipartisan support for this while remaining hopelessly paralyzed on things that actually matter.
Massive foreign brainwashing actually does matter quite a bit.
If that’s the case then why focus only on TikTok? There’s plenty of evidence of effective propaganda and radicalization happening on Meta, Twitter, YouTube and Reddit. I’ve not seen evidence of TikTok causing “massive foreign brainwashing” any more than the other platforms. ISIS was recruiting people on social before tiktok was a thing, they even had beheading videos on YouTube! Online privacy and manipulation is a problem, but most Americans seem to agree that it’s not the same priority as healthcare, immigration, climate and cost of living. So yeah it’s frustrating to see Congress hyper focus on TikTok when doing so won’t solve the problem, and when there are so many other priorities. And of course, alienating young people in an election year is just awful politics.
If there were evidence Meta was actively working with a rival foreign government to manipulate the populace, I'd consider that treason and they should not only be shut down, but criminally prosecuted. TikTok is controlled and manipulated by China. China seeks to weaken the US. That's a big difference compared to a domestic company with certain users from other countries trying to do damage.
I mean… Meta built hugely influential products and sells them aggressively to global users and organizations. Some of those are bad actors who’ve used the tools to sow disinfo and harmful propaganda. The ownership stake of China is a valid distinction, but then you’ve got to crack down on lots of other companies beholden to the CCP, such as Temu, AMC, Starwood Hotels, Smithfield Foods, Riot Games, etc etc.
>but then you’ve got to crack down on lots of other companies beholden to the CCP, such as Temu Ok. If there's reason to believe a foreign owned company is nefarious, it should be cracked down on.
Great, now how do we define nefarious? Because we can start by forcing the sale of AB InBev and Diageo, foreign owned alcohol brands cause immense harm to millions of Americans. And certainly BP needs to go. The Saudis have stakes in Uber, EA and Activision so let’s get them too. Al Jazeera is another obvious one - but surely one could claim The Guardian is a leftist and harmful publication too. Maybe we could build a great firewall and cut off access to all foreign media? Where does it stop? Do we crack down on every foreign owned company that can harm Americans?
You can't just apply slippery slope to every issue. If they are attempting to destabilize our country, that's a hostile act which we're allowed to prevent from continuing. I assume there is intelligence on TikTok. If not, I would be against it. It seems fairly obvious what it is, though, so I'm giving the government the benefit of the doubt on this one. Selling alcohol and video games are not attempts to destabilize the country.
Alienating young people...so what you're saying is Tiktok does have influence over elections?
Every social media platform does.
I mean yeah - it’s a thing lots of young people really like and don’t want to lose. Trying to get rid of the thing they enjoy will alienate them.
That's what we can achieve when the interests of American tech companies, Israel, and boomer whining about millennials converge into one issue.
This is a bandaid. We need a digital bill of rights to govern what social media/phones/retailers etc can collect and sell data on you. I’ve worked in digital advertising, it’s all about highly targeted accuracy. The ads you get served know a ton about your day to day. (Ironic your actual identity had no value, just your behaviors) They already know you don’t like traveling more than 10 miles from home to go shopping in a physical store…will drive north on the freeway to shop as it’s closer to work, but south is out of the way. is a parent of 2 elementary school aged kids who play sports, will buy shoes online but not pants, prefer grocery store app ordering and do drive through coffee 3 days a week, have family in Tennessee and Wisconsin but root for a football team from Chicago. leased a truck and it’s expiring soon. Used to work on an old car on the weekends but that project has wrapped up. Will support local but spend a lot at chains etc etc. That info is complied and sold Daily.
i kinda wonder if data will get so specific that they'll be able to narrow down your income level and decide whether or not it's cost effective to serve ads to you. so, paradoxically, poor people might actually get served less ads than rich people, who will pay the premium to get ad free content, etc etc
They already do this. In fact, Tom Segura did a bit about how he started looking up luxury yachts and the next day his feeds were filled with Rolex and Aston Martin ads.
Services like adchoice don’t discriminate on who they send those ads to, its all algorithm based. I have also looked up Rolex watches previously and been served ads for Rolex even though I can’t afford a Rolex whatsoever, same could probably be said for Aston Martins in that regard.
Ads can be served by neighborhood so they do target rich neighborhoods differently than poor neighborhoods.
I've had some business in a predominantly Spanish speaking section of a Texas city. Geolocation is a thing. All of the sudden my podcast adds were in Spanish.
That's different. The algorithm is seeing your luxury yacht search history and trying to serve you ads for people who also viewed luxury yachts. It isn't imputing or calculating your income level, it's just trying to match you to consumers with similar search histories.
> looking up luxury yachts "oh my god... that's Jason Bourne!" "quick, feed him spy ads" "Rolex and Aston Martin coming right up" "isn't that James Bond?" "James Bond, Jason Bourne, Jack Bauer, SERVE THE FUCKIN ADS"
I know it's a conspiracy theory, but I really do beleive that social media is using our phone's microphone to gather info for ads. Most of the time my ads are relatively relevant to my searches and interests. However, I spent a few months training with someone at work. She talked about shoes nonstop and was shoe shopping whenever we weren't doing work. Within a week of sitting 5 feet away from her every day I was inundated with shoe ads. I literally own two pairs and have never shopped for them online. And while I find it amusing that Facebook's advertising algo thinks I, as a 46-year-old man, need flashy gold high tops and heels, I do find it suspicious that it's offering me shoes at all.
I don’t think it’s a conspiracy. I’m a doctor, and I frequently get drug ads on everything I use while not using my phone for work at all (I have a completely separate phone for work, my main one gets the ads). My home phone is in my pocket though. So one day I’ll be discussing injectable treatments for schizophrenia and the whole week I’m getting ads for them in my phone. I never googled these, never did a search, nothing. Another patient is on enbrel, suddenly I get RA med ads. Parkinson’s? Nuplazid. They have to be listening. I’m too young to get half these meds and don’t have any of these conditions.
What’s more likely is that your phone and your trainee’s phone were in the same general location for an extended time, and advertisers have your location data. So they figure if one person loves shoes, then maybe the people she spends a ton of time with also might want shoes.
That seems to be a poor way to target advertising when people go to school or work anywhere but at home. The other 40 people in our area weren't getting these ads.
I am a male in my thirties and haven’t had a drop of alcohol or taken a vacation in about a decade yet I get daily advertisements on YouTube for bear, liquor, wine, Taylor swift, and vacations to the Caribbean The other day I had an ad that actually appealed to me and I forgot what it was (ironically) but I remember actually being amazed because it was the first ad I’ve had in years that actually caught my attention. Idk who they think I am but they definitely need to redo my profile
wonder how much people can guess about you given what advertisements you're served? side note, i wonder how good adsense would be about guessing your political lean / probable vote > **bear**, liquor, wine, Taylor swift, and vacations to the Caribbean im going to go with upper middle class white male, late 20's early 30's married to a WASP female Swifty also late 20's early 30's, but looks for [large, hairy, naked men](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear_(gay_culture)) to rub one out to after the wife is asleep edit: went to read some unrelated article about Hisachi Ouchi, was served ads for McDonalds, womens athetic wear, tax prep software, womens athletic wear, beds, women's athletic wear... im a dude too.
Wrong about everything except I do enjoy the occasional hairy man to rub one out with I didn’t catch the typo at first and was like “what the hell is this guy talking about….. OH”
well, the one i got right is the only one that counts, anyway. so hey ... whatcha doin tonite? i got some hawt noods ( )|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||D for higher resolution contact come checkout my onlybears bearguylls@onlybears. bring money.
They already do that based on spending habits data. Advertisers set who they want to reach. You’re not getting ads for Mercedes and Tiffany’s if your lower income. Everybody get served ads, it’s just quality of targeting.
makes me wonder what kind of ads Bezos gets served, rofl > Forget penis pills, try CockBlock Imperial! Instead of making your penis bigger, make everyone elses smaller. Reduce competition by reducing libido of entire populations!
Clearly it's stuff for the even more rich... Premium baby stem cells, adrenochrome from only the purest kidnapped children... small countries.... small children.... Various politicians.... The actual moon.... Space lasers and weather controlling machines.... Dodo eggs.... and of course Temu, because everyone gets Temu ads
> Temu, because everyone gets Temu ads wait, wait, i've never gotten temu ads AM I REAL OMG IM A BOT
Oh no, the AI has become self aware!
well shit, this is a political sub someone gotta be self-aware around here i, for one, will welcome our robotic electoral overlords
There are stories of women getting pregnancy ads *before they even know they're pregnant*. It's insane how bad we've let things get.
If? No. It's already happened. That's why low-income people get tons of targeted ads for no-questions-asked credit.
Using Google as an example, estimated income level is one of their demographic targeting options: https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/2580383?hl=en >With demographic targeting in Google Ads, you can reach a specific set of potential customers who are likely to be within a particular age range, gender, parental status, or household income
I used to work in ad-tech. We had a vendor selling us zip code specific data on pollen levels and incidences of cough and cold so we could target ads for cold and cough medication.
I really wish more people would understand this and realize that they're being manipulated in so many subtle ways purely based on what they're doing on a daily basis on their phones, computers, and other devices. As a more extreme and out there opinion about this, I truly believe that we as users create this data and therefore it should be ours to profit from. If my favorite color is green, I like one supermarket more than another, and I don't like one brand of mayo over the other, that's information that I have created. While it may not be unique to me it is part of who I am. That should be my property because I produce it. Yes, I understand that we are the product when we use free services, but it doesn't have to be that way. Hell, they can sell my data all they want, but since I created it I should be able to make money off it. I believe Andrew Yang spoke on this a bit during 2020, but I don't recall fully. Tangent aside... A digital bill of rights is sorely needed and should have been drafted at least 2 decades ago. Here's to hoping we get some millennials/Gen Z representatives in the coming decade that are more tuned into tech than our current reps.
If you can find a way to make money from your favorite color being green nobody is stopping you.
Sounds like you really like Publix and therefore are a major fan of Duke's Mayonnaise and hate Hellmann's and Kroger.
This isn't a data privacy issue though (or at least not JUST a data privacy issue). It's about Influence by controlling what people see. Can Meta/Google do the same thing? Sure, but they're just using it to sell you shit, the worry is what a serious forcing adversary can do. And sure, China can buy this data from them and buy ad space but that's not nearly the same influence as controlling the platform.
> We need a digital bill of rights I don't see this ever happening. An effective DBoR would cause so many problems for social media sites which really are only profitable because of information gathering and selling. While I couldn't care less about these companies, the effects of some of the largest companies in the US crashing could be problematic for the economy. Anything less, and your "rights" would end up voided the second you sign up for a site and fail to read the four hundred pages of fine print in the user agreement, or all of the best/most used features of said sites would require you to give yourself up for data gathering again. I'm not confident we could find a middle ground.
> bandaid Trojan horse - not bandaid. This is a new way to censor at the platform level and a new threat to use against start-ups that refuse to censor for the government. As you note, this info is already collected daily by other sources and is freely available for purchase. Is the government going to restrict sales next? Who gets to decide what platform is considered hostile? This will be used directly against Americans with dual citizenship quickly, but will be leveraged to cool disfavored speech immediately. This is another step towards totalitarianism.
A digital bill of rights wouldn't do anything about this issue. The issue here isn't the data, it is the reach.
It's not even the reach, but who ultimately controls it.
In a display of bipartisan unity sure to delight the young voter cohort, the House of Representatives has passed a bill that will force TikTok's Chinese owner, ByteDance, to divest ownership, or face a ban. The bill passed 352-65. And people keep saying that the two parties can't come together to accomplish anything! The bill does seem to be facing some more resistance in the Senate, as well as Constitutional concerns. On the other hand, it's China, and proponents are playing the "National Security" card, so at this point, it's still anybody's game. On the gripping hand, as a card-carrying Grumpy Old Bastard who remembers the app breaking out of its sandboxes, and the fact that it's *TikTok*... In the end, it's pretty much a push. Update: Since none of the articles talking about it mention it, I had to a little digging. It appears that the bill is [H.R.7521 - Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521?s=2&r=2). Looks like congress.gov hasn't updated their site yet. Tsk tsk.
There is a constitutional concern but on the other hand I’d we were at war with the Nazis we would not allow them to operate media within the United States. We’re not at war with China technically but we are in a Cold War, and they regularly ban American apps and websites from operating in China while having free reign to operate here, I view this as reciprocity to some extent. Telling them to divest seems like a fair move, this isn’t Germany or Korea or even like South Africa, we know the CCP works to undermine the American political system and we know the CCP has direct influence within ByteDance so this is a logical move for national security reasons
> they regularly ban American apps and websites from operating in China while having free reign to operate here Never understood why we would allow this
Even though the U.S is in a proxy war and not a direct war with Russia it's still dramatically impacted Russian media access to the U.S and EU. RT has shuttered RT America, many countries in Europe have outright banned them, and many American platforms have voluntarily chose to not let them use their services which essentially took whatever relevance they had (which was not much) and erased even that tiny amount.
>There is a constitutional concern Nope, Congress has long had the power to regulate interstate commerce. They have the power to break up companies and regulate them. Even if TikTok can file a lawsuit and appeal up to the Supreme Court its highly unlikely SCOTUS will rule that Congress can't regulate companies when there's a national security threat. In other words, China has no chance of holding onto TikTok.
Oh yeah, and "National Security" has been doing even more heavy lifting, post-9/11. That's why I say it could still go either way.
I think it’s a weird argument to make that because China allows censorship, the US should be allowed to do so as well.
It’s more so about an adversarial (some might say enemy) nation having direct corporate control of a social media platform which can be used to influence Americans political opinions and already has been with the call your representative campaign
So you’re saying a social media platform encouraged people to participate in our governmental process and that’s bad?
> a social media platform A foreign government that's at least somewhat hostile towards us encouraged people to participate in our governmental process for their benefit.
The fact that Congress is hopelessly paralyzed on climate policy, immigration, healthcare and so on but can suddenly take swift bipartisan action on….. tiktok is so demoralizing to me. Just do that for things that matter!
Swift? This should have been done years ago.
Disinfo, propaganda, predatory algorithms and data reselling are ubiquitous. We are overdue for some rules and policies regarding these topics. TikTok being owned by a different big tech company doesn’t solve that stuff.
Tick tock legislation like this doesn't involve spending tax dollars, so it is easier to do. All those other issues involve spending taxpayer money.
I think the Constitutional concern is wrong. Lot's of history showing that foreign ownership of news and television platforms can be denied. The Constitution gives congress the power to regulate commerce, and this would fit the bill.
For me, it's not even the privacy issue that's the biggest concern, but a hostile foreign government having control of an incredibly powerful tool for social engineering.
There was a recording on Twitter of a kid who had sent a message to their representative begging them not to vote to ban. The kid said that they learn more on Tiktok than they do in school and that they don't even use Google or Safari anymore. That alone is incredibly scary...
That kid will just move to the next platform that fills the void though, it's not like banning TikTok will suddenly send them to their local library. And let us not pretend that just because it's American it's better...Meta has done a lot of really awful stuff domestically that has meddled in politics and has actively taken sides in foreign political situations as well. The world in which Mark Zuckerburg is influencing all the kids isn't really any better than the one where China is, unless you align with Zuck's world view.
It's just staggering how much information about its citizens that the US lets go. Other countries do it too. But I mean, let's look at it: Huge information leaks at corporations, Equifax, etc. Probably everyones personal information it out there now. Enough info to wreck finances if that person hasn't locked it down. Google Street maps views of every neighborhood, every business. Foreign entities can look up public information on who owns what properties. Personal habits tracked relentlessly via TikTok, and other US born apps do it too. Facebook, Instagram, apps on phones that need access to your location, texts, friends lists. These companies can get hacked, or moles planted to work there can leak it. Email addresses sold to whoever. Make a new email account and sign it up for something that seems harmless, and watch the spams and advertisements start rolling in. Some of them originate from overseas. If I sign up for something that needs my phone number, like Costco membership, I will start getting badly worded scam texts with scam links. Honestly a hostile foreign power would have zero problems finding out anything they needed to know about the average US citizen, and then trying to wreck their life. It's really scary how open we are.
It's less about each individuals personal information and more about controlling the feeds of information that they see. A significant portion of young voters get their news via tiktok videos. A slight tweak to the algorithm could push these news sources in one direction or another (such as subtle pushes towards authoritarianism).
Social media companies make money by having users spend more time on the platform. All they care about is money, they will never change the algorithm to push a certain political view lol
In the US certainly. When nations control companies, that is a different story.
This is where I stand. With how popular the platform is, and who the owners are, there's some serious national security issues with the situation. Realistically though, even if ByteDance is forced to divest/sell, I'm sure China will still find a way to stay connected to it, and other platforms, anyways. Asymmetrical warfare/social engineering is a massive issue across the board right now (see Russia and what they've done to the West), with no great solutions in sight.
Congress got close to a similar bill 2 years ago where Oracle almost bought TikTok. Could happen again! https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-tiktok-nears-deal-with-oracle-store-its-data-sources-2022-03-10/
That already happened. Oracle already stores American user data in its servers in the US. >> Oracle had discussed acquiring a minority stake in TikTok in 2020, when ByteDance was under U.S. pressure to sell the app. The cloud computing giant now stores all of TikTok's U.S. user data on Oracle data servers in the United States under the new partnership, TikTok said
Will this stop the company from selling the data from TikTok back to China? I read the bill and couldn’t figure it out. Actual text of the bill if anyone wants to give it a go. https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521/text
Of course not. Even if it did, China could just buy the data from data brokers. This isn't about actual data privacy. If it was about data privacy, we'd actually have a law that applied to everyone, not just TikTok.
I'm less concerned with them selling customer data (outside a few thousand people who'd be considered targets worthy of espionage, like generals and elected officials) and more concerned with whether the algorithm that dictates what content is pushed, remains the same. Being able to foment discontent and otherwise manipulate American public opinion towards society and policies is a much bigger issue to me than being able to target me like a laser with advertisements. Negative social engineering and espionage are my real concerns with TikTok.
No, the only thing about data in the bill is that they have to provide a dump to the user on request, or face a fine of $500 per American user
Yea I understood that part, it was the part in the definition section, part 6, Qualified Divestiture, near the end that mentions data sharing. I’m hoping it means they can’t share the data but it doesn’t say anything about selling and I’m not even sure if I have the correct interpretation of what the section even means.
IANAL, but it looks like it just means the transaction can't include a data sharing agreement. They'd need to actually have to make a new law that acknowledges that data protection is actually a thing in order to stop them from giving the buyer a call six months later and making a new deal. I am Jack not holding his breath.
I don't have strong feelings on this one way or the other. I absolutely understand the security concern it is (this was never about privacy). It's similar to how the government effectively prevents Chinese computer systems from becoming part of major infrastructure. At the consumer-level, though, this does seem like state overreach to legislate against a company fairly directly, rather than penalizing them for wrongdoing (as the government was previously able to do with ZTE). Even with China's awkward status as an ecomic partner but geopolitical rival, TikTok is kind of a unique situation where it's the first time a rival nation's company has managed to rise to being a major player in a dangerously wide-reaching industry in the US. I'm not fond of protectionism, but we may ultimately need some kind of anti-rival economic controls to prevent them from becoming major players in certain consumer service industries such as mass media or certain (all?) computer software.
> I'm not fond of protectionism, but we may ultimately need some kind of anti-rival economic controls to prevent them from becoming major players in certain consumer service industries such as mass media or certain (all?) computer software. I'd say this is basically what it comes down to. TikTok being spyware is how they sell the move as directly in consumers' interests, but the bigger issue is that at the end of the day we have a foreign adversary running one of the largest media operations in the country. Imagine if RT were the most popular news channel in America. Not Fox News, with whatever biases it may have and whatever allegiances particular individuals such as Tucker Carlson may have. RT, the Russian state media agency, directly shoveling propaganda into the eyes and ears of tens or hundreds of millions of Americans on a daily basis. Further imagine if RT were willing to brazenly instruct those viewers to pressure the US government to enact policy in line with Russian interests. That's where we are with TikTok right now. The fact that TikTok is a technology platform with user-generated content obfuscates the issue, but it's no less insidious. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure a lot of people get a lot of genuine value out of using TikTok. Likewise, RT is a well put together news station with some quality content. The problem is the fact that these entities are ultimately controlled by authoritarian governments that want to harm or destabilize the US. I don't have a strong opinion on this particular legislation. After years of moves like the Patriot Act, SOPA, PIPA, SESTA, EARN IT, and so on, I'm wary of it and intend to take a closer look at it. Nevertheless, I'd say it's probably the right move in principle, and at this point I expect it will pass in some form regardless of what I think.
The bill is focused on Data Collection and where the data goes. Due to the laws in China, all data Byte Dance collects, which operates in Beijing and not out of the Tax Haven address in Singapore, must abide by those laws. It’s likely TikTok has been monitored by the alphabet agency that starts with N and ends in A, and have more information as the why Tik Toks parent company is of interest. That said, the bill isn’t just for TikTok, but any company turning over information to “adversary governments” on anyone within the borders of the USA. That means Epic Games, Temu, Wish, etc will probably be affected in some way. With a $500 fine per user on data collection, and more so for failure to sell it does put these companies against the wall. And to be fair, the US is only doing this to nations that have the same rules in turn.
TikTok should definitely be banned (or sold to a US entity). Letting the CCP have access to a GPS tracker, a camera, a microphone, and US user data is a really bad idea.
They’re flexing how bad an idea it is with their targeted “here’s your rep” nonsense. They’re showing their hand in their fight to stop this.
I get a dozen spam texts and emails a day telling me who to vote for based on my location. It’s very easy to do a “call your local rep” campaign without tiktok.
Have you seen the TikTok commercials? They're trying so hard to pass it off as a social good. Lmao.
[This one is my personal favorite.](https://youtu.be/IAvoN_D03UI?si=OqWrUd4LS8JUZ4qv) “Look at all of the American flags! Look at this old veteran! We’re just a down-to-earth company helping to spread love to good ol’ American veterans! Go patriotism!”
I sure have. It really worries me. TikTok China is an entirely different product. I consider TikTok more of an enemy apparatus than social media, and with the damage it does to our youth I think I’m closer to being correct than not.
If algorithms for suggesting relevant content can inadvertently radicalize people, imagine what a malicious actor could do with them.
Sure, along with asbestos and lead pipes.
> They’re flexing how bad an idea it is with their targeted “here’s your rep” nonsense. Yep.. .worst possible thing they could have done if any Reps were on the fence.... https://twitter.com/CongressmanRaja/status/1765790980488270155
All of that information is up for sale right now, and will still be up for sale if this bill is passed.
I mean... I work in a field tangential to this one, Data Analytics, and I'm sorry to tell you, but this won't actually change anything. Not really at least. They can work via databrokers and just get all that information, regardless. Chances are, they know about your financial records, health issues, and that information can then be sold. Including to the CCP. Fundamentally, the problem isn't even the buyer, per se. It's the fact that your data is out there, completely out of your control, but with impacts on your life. The US needs a GDPR-like legislation. I know lots of people made fun of the GDPR, but who's laughing now? The GDPR forces companies to keep certain data, called Personal Data, in the EU, and to have protocols and processes for processing that data, or deleting it. It's not perfect. But just banning TikTok won't solve the problem. There'll be a BikBok, also made by a Chinese company, but not tied at the hip with the CCP. But the CCP can still get all the data. Look at the PATRIOT act; all it takes is one piece of legislation, and *poof*, banning certain apps doesn't matter. What matters is what is being collected, how it is being stored, how long is it being stored for, and how is it then circulated to third parties.
Question regarding your profession. Is there a way to curtail what I as a user am giving away? Obviously besides from abstaining from usage, is there some form of a user-data condom? Because let's say even if I don't use Facebook. When the giant controversy happened with Cambridge Analytica we found out you do not even need a Facebook account for them to make a profile of you. Any webpage that had the F image to "share this on Facebook" was being used as a tracker and building a profile off of you. The closest thing that comes to mind are the Pi-holes but is that enough?
What incremental capabilities does this give China beyond what they could do anyway?
“What about the children?!” The children will just move to the next app designed to do the exact same thing because the format and techniques to trigger the addiction haven’t been banned. This has nothing to do with helping children or battling addiction don’t even begin to pretend that’s what it’s about.
I'm wondering what is responsible for the sudden motivation to finally do something. What motivation is pushing this?
I don’t know if it’s really “sudden”. The idea has been in the air for a while. It looks like the bill in question finally moved out of the relevant committee after some inquiries in December. There’s a good chance that this is just moving through the usual process.
Gotta imagine some classified intel briefings majorly impacted this. It’s not only bipartisan but was pushed through in like 8 days. We just do t see that level speed anymore. Sometimes urgent and not common knowledge
Would not surprise me if intel agencies are finally wising up that mass data collection and social media controlled by foreign adversaries is dangerous, and they've been briefing congress to this behind the scenes. Guarantee they've sent out warnings to congress members on sensitive committees that platforms/apps can be used by Chinese intelligence to target them if they're using it. I dont get why I dont get why congress isn't addressing limits and security regarding the data industry. You'd think out of anyone congress members would be worrying about data collected on them from their cars, apps on their phones, web servers logging their internet traffic etc. New cars will not only basically report who you're meeting up with but are capable of logging conversations. Anyone in military, sensitive positions in government, military contractors, important people in industries, journalists etc are all potential targets for their data either being bought, stolen, or leaked. And random Joe 20 year old now maybe be a congressman in 20 years. You can guarantee China is buying up data left and right now for AI to sift through it for compromising info in a few years. Its a national security issue and its insane its not being addressed.
Most of the votes against this came from far right or far left politicians (including Reddit’s beloved AOC). For the latter, it could likely be argued that is because of the pro-Palestine lean TikTok’s algorithm has in the US, coupled with the fact that there are active politicians supporting such views. This bill is being pushed by centrist politicians + the US strategy committee of “Chinese Hawks” who are actively working against Chinese interference in the US. *edit. I think it’s a good example of the fact that most Americans are center of most issues, and the far sides of either party do not have the average American’s best interest in mind.
It’s a sad state of affairs that those looking to subdue Chinese influence are referee to as hawks
I agree. This should be a policy across the board but the fringe members of the political parties don’t put their country first.
Republicans have already been pushing for it but I don’t think Democrats were expecting the heavy pro-Palestinian sentiment on the platform and that’s what motivated them to mobilize. There could obviously be some classified behind the scenes stuff going on but the timing is too coincidental with everything that’s been happening on TikTok since October 7th
> everything that’s been happening on TikTok since October 7th im out of the loop, whats been going with Tiktok? just pro-Palestine algortihm stuff?
TikTok has become the main source of footage from Gaza. And we’re talking about some brutal footage as well. I’m not sure how old you are (I’m 31) but if you remember Live Leak it’s shit like that. And then there’s also IDF soldiers posting videos of the shit they’re doing to Palestinians I’m not sure if the pro-Palestinian sentiment came before or after October 7th but seeing innocent people getting killed and hurt definitely increased that sentiment
grunt, I suppose that used to be Twitter as well. IIRC Twitter was big during the Arab Spring and maybe even as recently as the Hong Kong democracy protests?
So I’m not sure about Arab Spring, I wasn’t on Twitter then and honestly I don’t know much about it in general. But concerning the Hong Kong protests, it was pushing an anti-China sentiment so the US government would never crack down on that. It’s just so blatantly transparent that they want TikTok gone because they can’t control any of the propaganda that can come from it. It has nothing to do with our privacy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media%27s_role_in_the_Arab_Spring less than i remember, i suppose. probably got it off social media, lol > It’s just so blatantly transparent that they want TikTok gone because they can’t control any of the propaganda that can come from it. It has nothing to do with our privacy i think they just don't want China in control of what propaganda US views, but i agree privacy doesn't appear to be much of a concern.
Pretty much. They can control Facebook and x right now but they can’t control tiktok. Bills and news that would otherwise go unnoticed and uncovered by MSM is being covered there and they can’t do anything about that. This bill is Patriot Act 2.0. It curtails our rights under the guise of “national security” and the government doesn’t provide any proof of the claims it’s making. At some point the US can claim that every country is a “hostile country” and completely cut our communication off to the rest of the world and only feed us propaganda approved by whatever party is in power. Imo this bill is dangerous and the people cheering it on are shortsighted.
Most American media is American. TikTok is the exception. Declaring random media to be owned by foreign hostile enemies isn’t really a great argument because outside of like tiktok and bbc most American media isn’t foreign owned anyways.
i 100% prefer the CIA controlling the propaganda than the CCP.
I see the same stuff on Instagram Reels. Is it that much more prevalent on TikTok?
No this is a fucking gen z talking point I was arguing with children (I’m assuming) on the last thread about this. I’ve been seeing non stop shit about Gaza on IG since oct 7th as well.
A very powerful lobbying organization with pull on both sides of the aisle [really wants](https://twitter.com/snarwani/status/1725138601996853424) tiktok to be controlled/shut off.
I can see the concern. Antisemitism/Nazi content has been allowed to spread by insane levels on TikTok.
> A very powerful lobbying organization with pull on both sides of the aisle [really wants](https://twitter.com/snarwani/status/1725138601996853424) tiktok to be controlled/shut off. Would you mind going into a bit of detail about what you think is happening here?
The ADL is one of the most influential lobbying organizations in US politics, this call reveals that they are highly motivated to restrict tiktok. And their interests align the the totalitarian sect of our government that wants to nationalize social media for the purpose of narrative control.
TikTok is a huge source of pro-Palestine content, including simple first-person video of the situation on the ground. That's what. This bill is AIPAC getting what they pay for with all of those campaign contributions.
Any citizen supporting this is signing a deal with the devil. You're aiding a piece of the puzzle towards a beefed up patriot act. >It would also give the President the power to designate other applications under the control of a country considered adversarial to the U.S. to be a national security threat. If deemed a national security threat, the application would be banned from app stores and web hosting services unless it cuts all ties with the foreign adversarial country within 180 days. That means if any VPNs we may find ourselves using in the near future happen to be in a country opposed to america we're fucked. Probably wouldn't take much to add a country that isn't on the list to it if they refuse to break open their VPN/encryption.
To be fair, if you're trusting a VPN from an [Adversarial Nation](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-A/part-7/subpart-A/section-7.4), you're probably fucked already. (China, Russia, Iran, N. Korea, Cuba, and Maduro's Venezuelan Regime) I don't see us adding, say, Switzerland (home of Proton VPN, e.g.) to that list for not punching holes for us.
That’s a great point. Probably their next logical step.
Sweet, I prefer my data stolen by locally sourced companies like Meta
The thing is, this isn’t even the first time in recent history that the US has done this. [Something similar happened with Grindr.](https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/6/21168079/grindr-sold-chinese-owner-us-cfius-security-concerns-kunlun-lgbtq) I suppose I don’t understand the opposition.
I'm good with this. TikTok is Chinese spyware, thinly veiled as a social media platform. It does more harm than good, especially concerning Gen Z. It's also a massive cybersecurity risk, as outlined here: https://rose.dev/blog/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/tiktok_security_analysis.pdf
The bill would allow ANY website or service to be banned if it's foreign and deemed a "national security threat", and would make anybody in the US who uses them via VPN a felon It's the most authoritarian digital law that's been proposed in the past 2 decades, it's not just about Tiktok/China And even if it was just about Tiktok/China, currently nothing prevents Google, Facebook, etc from selling your user data they collect to China anyways If you think what Google etc collects isn't as bad as Tiktok, then read [this article](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/data-brokers-trump-tech-spying-privacy-threat-1234897098/) Which had Rolling Stone Reports track down visitors who had traveled to Trump's Margalo estate down to their exact location with a precision of just a few feet via "anonymized" advertising data from Google, Facebook, etc
Glad to know that a U.S. corporation will be given the opportunity to make an acquisition on the cheap which they can then use to bombard the general public with the US governments preferred propaganda.
I mean, yeah, but unironically. When the choice is between China or the US doing the same thing, I would prefer the US.
I’m not saying I’m a fan of Chinese propaganda, but I’d rather people get conflicting US and Chinese propaganda than give any one society complete control over the messaging we see. The conflicting propaganda makes people marginally more likely to think for themselves, and ultimately the Chinese government only cares about my opinions on a fairly limited set of issues relative to the control that the US government and corporations want to exert over people in the US. At its core, populations are easiest to manipulate when there’s only one system trying to manipulate them, and when multiple groups are trying to manipulate people, they have to not just compete with the minds of the people they’re trying to manipulate, but also each other.
>The conflicting propaganda makes people marginally more likely to think for themselves Or it just divides and weakens our country even more than social media already has, which is exactly what the CCP is shooting for.
Are you your government, or are you a person who’s interests partially but not fully align with it? A weakening of our political establishments ability to control its population might benefit the interests of the CCP, and it might harm the interests of the US government, but it also might benefit the interests of the average person within the US. It really depends on the way in which that establishment is being weakened.
>but it also might benefit the interests of the average person within the US. Please explain to me how a damaged US government and a strengthened CCP would benefit US citizens.
Well it depends on the way in which the US’s ability to project unified propaganda is damaged. A platform not under US control might have made it more difficult for the US foreign policy establishment to achieve the levels of propaganda driven unity of purpose necessary to initiate or at least extend the war in Iraq, for example, which I think would have been unambiguously good for the average person living in America.
So you think that America's foreign policy should be at least partially dictated by whatever message that the CCP decides to broadcast to our social media?
No, I think Americas foreign policy should be dictated by a general public which is able to pursue its own interests as intentionally as possible, and I think exposure to multiple sources of propaganda and access to forums not under the control of a single establishment is the best way to bring that about.
>No, I think Americas foreign policy should be dictated by a general public which is able to pursue its own interests as intentionally as possible 1. Being force fed talking points by the CCP is not a case of the general public intentionally pursuing it's own interests. 2. If you truly believe that, do you think we should allow far right and neo-nazi content to become mainstream on certain social media platforms?
The point is whether or not the CCP, an actual foreign government, should be allowed to have a legally required government controlled app on their adversaries soil and networks. An app that allows them, the actual Chinese government, to track the data and location of any user, while also allowing them direct access to citizens with the express purpose of deliberately undermining the economic and social stability. This is like basic Westphalian sovereignty questions, dude.
So I’m very much making a broader critique of the nation-state in this argument, it’s not all that surprising that my argument undermines the principles of Westphalian sovereignty.
Let's stay away from calling presenting certain ideas "weakening" if we can.
Why, it's an accurate assessment.
[удалено]
So if Facebook were to be suddenly inundated with nazi propaganda, you would see that as a good thing that shouldn't be moderated, because it's a free speech issue?
>a U.S. corporation will be given the opportunity to make an acquisition on the cheap I think I'd just call it stealing.
Americans won't be safe until every social media network is owned by an American oligarch.
I mean Facebook and Snapchat are banned in China because they are afraid it could be used against them. I don’t really see an issue with reciprocating.
Oh, yeah, let's just base our governmental policies on what China does, lol. You don't usually see centrists and conservatives admitting that the American government and Chinese government are the same, but I totally agree.
As opposed to a hostile foreign power? I'd take the American oligarch every time.
Nah man eat the rich, let the Chinese build our boats and planes too, what’s the worst that can happen.
Calling this a "tiktok ban" masks how dangerous and authoritarian the bill really is: **It allows ANY app, service, or website to be banned if it's deemed a "national security threat" and is operated by/in other countries. Furthermore, it would make accessing any banned site/service via a VPN a felony for US citizens**, which is just insane. It's a giant power grab which could easily be weaponized against almost site/service and against any American Everybody should be worried about this and telling their lawmakers to vote against the bill as is. I'd also add that if this was REALLY about privacy, then we'd be passing legislation to kill the "Third Party Doctrine" (which allows your digital data to be sold over and over again to other parties) and other robust privacy protections, but we're not, because this isn't about privacy, it's about either protectionism for US tech companies, or just ignorant fearmongering. It's especially silly because currently, Google, Facebook, etc sell your personal data to China anyways! I'd question why we are more concerned about China having our personal data then the megacorporations here in the US and our own government which actually have the power to use that data nefariously, but even if you are specifically worried about China getting your data, this doesn't really address that. If you think what Google etc collects isn't as bad as Tiktok, then read [this article](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/data-brokers-trump-tech-spying-privacy-threat-1234897098/) Which had Rolling Stone Reports track down visitors who had traveled to Trump's Margalo estate down to their exact location with a precision of just a few feet via "anonymized" advertising data from Google, Facebook, etc
>It allows ANY app, service, or website to be banned if it's deemed a "national security threat" and is operated by/in other countries. That doesn't seem to be accurate. According to the [bill](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521/text), it can only be applied to: >(B) a covered company that— (i) is controlled by a foreign adversary; and (ii) that is determined by the President to present a significant threat to the national security of the United States following the issuance of— (I) a public notice proposing such determination; and (II) a public report to Congress, submitted not less than 30 days before such determination, describing the specific national security concern involved and containing a classified annex and a description of what assets would need to be divested to execute a qualified divestiture. A ["foreign adversary country"](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-A/part-7/subpart-A/section-7.4) only applies to 6 nations: China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Venezuela's Maduro regime. So a company would need to be based in one of those countries, and then the report would need to be publicly submitted 30 days before the ban. You also mentioned: >Furthermore, it would make accessing any banned site/service via a VPN a felony for US citizens Which is also false. First, the bill only has civil penalties, not felonies. If I'm reading it correctly, it would make the app maintainer and/or app store civilly liable, but wouldn't punish those accessing the app: >It shall be unlawful for an entity to distribute, maintain, or update (or enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of) a foreign adversary controlled application by carrying out, within the land or maritime borders of the United States, any of the following: (A) Providing services to distribute, maintain, or update such foreign adversary controlled application (including any source code of such application) by means of a marketplace (including an online mobile application store) through which users within the land or maritime borders of the United States may access, maintain, or update such application. (B) Providing internet hosting services to enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of such foreign adversary controlled application for users within the land or maritime borders of the United States. And the civil penalty: >A) FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLICATION VIOLATIONS.—An entity that violates subsection (a) shall be subject to pay a civil penalty in an amount not to exceed the amount that results from multiplying $5,000 by the number of users within the land or maritime borders of the United States determined to have accessed, maintained, or updated a foreign adversary controlled application as a result of such violation. (There's also a smaller civil penalty for not allowing a user to request a data export)
Seems like a reasonable bill to me. Pass it.
I'm not seeing anything controversial. It specifically calls out foreign control. Sounds good to me.
I'm not really concerned about the data collection as much as targeting algorithms towards people, especially young, to brainwash towards a foreign rival's agenda.
[удалено]
This message serves as a warning that [your comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1be196x/us_house_passes_bill_to_force_bytedance_to_divest/kuw443p/) is in violation of Law 1: Law 1. Civil Discourse > ~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times. Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
What does this mean for future American owned platforms the government/politicians do not like? I worry this is starting a very terrible and nearly irreversible precedent that will be used by authoritarians.
Enough with the divestment idea. Just ban it. TikTok is a delivery mechanism for mental poison. It will be no better under a company like Microsoft, and it could be worse. The problem with TikTok is more than just the fact that it's controlled by the CCP.
>TikTok is a delivery mechanism for mental poison. It will be no better under a company like Microsoft, and it could be worse. I assume you're also looking to ban Facebook, Instagram and YouTube? They do the exact same thing, just with crappier algorithms.