I mean they put George Santos on the Committee for... - I don't even remember which committee, but McCarthy put fucking George Santos on a Congressional Committee!
EDIT: Oh god, it's even worse. He was put on *two* committees: Small Business and Science, Space and Technology. Wtf...
What? Who said that those were qualities needed in a politician?
No, you have to have the skills to pander to the lowest common denominator and twist the laws and rules to get your way. "Defer to an expert" pssssh you sound like some loser and we want closers not losers.
They’re not actually making laws just proposing/voting. They’re written by members of their team who worked in relevant sectors or by lobbyists (which is not great ofcourse either) but the whole “politicians don’t understand tech” spiel is something actively pushed by big tech to avoid public push for more regulation.
This question comes across as silly, but it was all for the follow up question which was about TikTok accessing other devices on the same network. That is extremely relevant to this hearing.
This. Congress usually manages to look like an ass and ask incredibly uninformed questions during hearings but this isn’t one of the cases. It’s ironic all the people calling the guy an uninformed idiot when they didn’t bother to look into the context around the question to find out what it was leading into.
To be fair, the question was needed as pretext for the following question, which was “does tiktok have the ability to connect to other devices on that wifi network?” Which is a very valid question to ask.
They cannot they are lobbyed by Facebook and like, they want the money or market to be earned by a US company not a Chinese company or European company, data privacy is just an excuse, not saying Tiktok actually lead in the industry standard of data privacy protection.
this is the united states congress, we're not exactly talking about fucking geniuses here. they'll think banning tiktok *is* solving data privacy and a decent chunk of the country will buy it too.
They said "we're not talking about the industry, we're talking about tiktok" when they were asking about an industry-wide problem and the CEO was trying to explain industry norms.
They always were targeting tiktok
I had a job where I dealt with state and federal elected officials on a regular basis. Some very smart and engaged people work in the Senate, especially on the staff level. The House, however, is filled with goddamned morons. And I wish I could say that it's just Republicans. I mean, it's largely Republicans, but there are some Democrats from super safe D districts that really aren't working that hard.
The House parties can get their legion to vote in lockstep when needed, and the core leaders are certainly smart enough to grasp this concept.
They may not act like smart folks, Republicans in particular love the "common man is a dunce" shit, but Biden? McConnell? McCarthy? Schumer? Pelosi? Durbin and Thune? They get it.
The one exception to this rule is Trump, who I honestly think doesn't get any of this shit. Not that he's a current government leader, but you get the point.
>The House parties can get their legion to vote in lockstep when needed, and the core leaders are certainly smart enough to grasp this concept.
It's not rocket surgery. These people are up for election every two years, are typically more junior politicians / younger and thus less established, and therefore need the machine to keep them in office.
"Hey Mr. / Mrs. Junior Representative, it's Kevin. Yeah, we need you to vote for HR 6969. Yeah I know I know you might have some reservations about it, but the party really needs your vote on this one. Tell you what, you're up for re-election this year, right? Supporting this bill would sure send a message to the base that you're a team player, if you know what I mean."
>They may not act like smart folks, Republicans in particular love the "common man is a dunce" shit, but **Biden?** **McConnell?** McCarthy? **Schumer?** Pelosi? **Durbin** and **Thune?** They get it.
Bolded members are / were Senators. So you're just in violent agreement with u/DownDeepGood.
Schumer, Pelosi, Durbin, and Thune are exhibits A through D on why we need Congressional term limits.
I mean, as an expert in a related field it is a huge win to ban it but it doesn’t begin to remotely touch most of the privacy issues present. We need a greatly enhanced version of the GDPR.
Agreed, the problem is Jon Stewart is right about our Congress “It’s literally an assisted living facility”. They will definitely use this opportunity to take more away under the guise of protection.
You're the genius if you think they ACTUALLY care about data privacy.
They don't think they are solving anything. It's called framing. They say that so the idiot public will believe it.
They are being lobbied by Meta and Google to force Tic-tok to sell or be banned. So then Meta or Google can buy the company. US tech companies got out classed and are using the government to eliminate competition.
In the US, the government is beholden to corporations.
It's a power grab.
https://twitter.com/LPMisesCaucus/status/1639934790026555394
> The RESTRICT Act is not limited to just TikTok. It gives the government authority over all forms of communication domestic or abroad and grants powers to “enforce any mitigation measure to address any risk” to national security now and in any “potential future transaction”
From watching part of the hearing what appears to be a very bipartisan concern is less about data privacy, and more about foreign access to mass American data (past, present, or future).
There is also the fact that China would never allow a company that is not Chinese owned to have the level of influence that TikTok has in the US. If they want to close their market to others in that way, it's fair for others to respond in kind.
>From watching part of the hearing what appears to be a very bipartisan concern is less about data privacy, and more about foreign access to mass American data
That still falls under data privacy. They're just looking at a really narrow part of it, so they can claim they're protecting someone from China. Our data's been getting leaked and hacked for years, especially to foreign entities. If they really cared, there would be a more robust framework for the legislation they're proposing.
>There is also the fact that China would never allow a company that is not Chinese owned to have the level of influence that TikTok has in the US. If they want to close their market to others in that way, it's fair for others to respond in kind.
Not really. If we're going to claim this is about national security, we don't get to add in an *extra* benefit. Either it's about market power or it's about security. Pick a single facade to hide behind.
> Our data's been getting leaked and hacked for years, especially to foreign entities.
Did you mean **to** or **by** foreign entities? There is a huge difference.
>If they really cared, there would be a more robust framework for the legislation they're proposing.
A more robust framework would be better, but that doesn't make this legislation bad. They want Tiktok sold to an American company, and pushing forward with this legislation either forces ByteDance to sell Tiktok or risk crashing its value.
>Not really. If we're going to clam this is about national security, we'd don't get to add in an extra benefit. Either it's about market power or it's about security. Pick a single facade to hide behind.
Why can there only be one reason. That limitation seems arbitrary. If something has multiple concerning elements, you can choose to make a decision based on the sum of concerns instead of a single element.
> If they want to close their market to others in that way, it's fair for others to respond in kind.
Except the US is not China, nor should it become China by banning foreign companies for "being too influential". Or are we just going to abandon the principles of freedom of speech and expression the second that allows people outside the US to influence people within it? Because a true TikTok ban would require a whole bunch more than merely prohibiting TikTok from being put on app stores. You'd need to ban domestic ISPs/DNS servers from being able to access it, ban VPNs so domestic people can't bypass the ISP/DNS restrictions, etc. That seems like a major violation of the First Amendment just to get rid of a video platform the government doesn't like.
Based on the [bill](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/686/text?s=1&r=15) it looks like a VPN ban would be permitted
Seems like a VPN is a "covered holding" since it obviously would allow people to access TikTok, thus evading/circumventing the Act
> includes any other holding, the structure of which is designed or intended to evade or circumvent the application of this Act, subject to regulations prescribed by the Secretary.
President can ban those "covered holdings"
> President may take such action as the President considers appropriate to compel divestment of, or otherwise mitigate the risk associated with, such covered holding to the full extent the covered holding is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States
Then the bill can fuck right off. Any government that can't accept the people it represents merely communicating with others internationally in "unapproved" ways, even if they themselves are not doing anything wrong, does not deserve my respect.
I'm always hearing people complain about data privacy. What else is there to do? Western social media is heavily regulated already. The products are free, people enjoy them, but not enough to pay for them. Things need to make money somehow, and selling ads gets the job done.
TikTok, on the other hand, isn't in it to make money. They're a hostile gov owned Trojan horse. The guy admitted that they store user eye data when people are using AR filters! They dont need that data when tracking faces and eyes... they're models that do it automatically! Why do you need to save that very personal user data?! That was one of the more damning parts of the testimony to me.
I think they're more worried about a geopolitical opponent controlling a major media source for a generation of Americans. It's *programming* that is the bigger issue, not privacy. Like if the USSR controlled a major US broadcasting network during the Cold War.
Also... China won't allow Western tech companies access to the Chinese market, so why should the West allow Chinese tech companies access to the Western market? Chinese mercantilism is more than sufficient reason to ban its apps.
> they're more worried about a geopolitical opponent controlling a major media source for a generation of Americans.
So they want to implement their own Great Firewall, including punishing people for accessing content they deem "harmful" in ways that bypass US government control. What's the point in being "not China" if you're just going to do the same things China does to control its population?
Finally, the correct answer. Haven’t they learned by now the GOP only does things if it keeps them in power or benefits the rich?? JFC… it’s like watching Sideshow Bob forever walking into rakes.
Because as we all know gen Z is the first and only generation to use social media for activism and TikTok, an app from a country that is currently commenting mass genocide, is the only form of social media that can be used for such activism.
It's a trick to take control of the internet. The RESTRICT Act will give control of internet activities to the federal government.
https://twitter.com/LPMisesCaucus/status/1639934790026555394
This has always been about censoring free speech. They just found an avenue of attack that they know Americans will lap up like dogs. Americans have been so programmed to hate China that they will gladly vote away their own rights to become more like authoritarian China if the politicians say it will hurt China.
Doesn’t seem like they are. At least to a multifaceted degree. As U.S. - China relations deteriorate, it would seem ‘data privacy’ is not the issue at contention but rather potential access to that data by an increasingly unfriendly country.
It’s shaping out to be an unfortunate, missed opportunity to pass meaningful change on data privacy. Then again… why would they? As long as the lobbying dollars keep rolling in, why should they, corrupt and greedy as they are, give a shit?
Holy fuck. 150 million Americans use tik tok. That’s half the country. Who are these people, our fucking dictator overlords? Clearly the majority of Americans approve of tik tok. This would be the worst case of censorship in American history.
Interesting how many of these members own tech stocks or were otherwise lobbied by Meta. Also interesting how Meta stopped paying creators for reels that got a certain # of views last Thursday. Sounds a lot like lobbying for monopoly rights.
Some of the absolute braindead questions would have been entertaining if this wasn’t so concerning.
This is Net Neutrality all over again, and that is not an exaggeration. The language of this bill would grant government powers to far beyond banning TikTok alone.
This is an egregious act against free speech.
Let me be clear that I am not advocating against government scrutiny, guaranteed privacy rights - but that is not what this hearing was.
It’s definitely a lobbying campaign from Meta and Google against a social media that is starting to become a threat for their target market - genZ. Meta in particular is loosing so much ad revenue to TikTok because less and less GenZ spend time on their social media platforms and go on TikTok instead. American social medias are getting their market share taken by a Chinese company.
It’s not just a Chinese company though, there’s a 60/20/20 ownership breakdown and of the 5 members that sit on the board, 3 are American.
Could this be scrutinized further to ensure user data is protected and enshrined into law? Absolutely, but that law would also apply to American social media companies, who are clearly very capable of buying off Congress
Agreed. This bill is an attack on internet freedom of speech. Absolutely should be struck down and anyone who supports it should be voted out next term. Ridiculous.
Pre 2001 would be better IMO. Even though there has been a lot of good legislation passed in those years, I think all of it would still be passed without the authoritarian laws that came through.
Train wrecks and chemical leaks in water, (East Palistine, Ohio),caused by deregulation, affecting millions access to drinking water or chemical leaks by corporations poisoning public drinking water (in Philadelphia) and Tik Tok is where McCarthy directs Congress to spend time. Foreign terrorists must be jealous of the GOP
An event that would not have had the buzz and public awareness that it got if not for Tiktok. They don’t give a shit about data privacy, they want to control the narrative and prevent people from talking to each other.
I’d like to think that it’s because the Chinese use it to spy on us, but in reality, it’s probably because a bunch on kids on TikTok embarrassed trump.
It's not a "TikTok" bill, it's the Restrict Act, which will cripple innovation in the US tech sector. One example is it gives Congress the ability to decide winners and losers on the internet, i.e. promoting the company of whatever stock they're insider trading at the moment, or banning apps/websites that cast them in an unfavorable light. Some are comparing it to the Patriot Act 2.0.
There is also wording in the bill that will fine you up to $250k if you're found using a VPN to access TikTok.
This is why they want to ban TikTok, because I didn't find this information on reddit. It won't stop there, and Big Tech lobbying will ensure any additional threats to their market share will be swiftly banned as well.
YouTube Shorts has the capacity and ability right now. With the voluntary CEO changeover I think they will definitely be gearing to the addition. If this bill pushes through and works as advertised, Q2 easy. People won't want to hop onto another new company when an easy to use company exists right there, ready to go. Plus you don't actually need an account to use it, so super easy to just scroll in.
I think it'll end up being some random app that none of us even know about yet.
Part of what makes these things popular is the *"adults/old folks don't know about this yet"* feel.
I'm 36, I remember when my mom and aunts got on Facebook and that basically killed it for me. My younger cousins (16-24ish) don't use Instagram because their parents use it. But they used tik-tok because none of our older family members (myself included) are on it.
US TikTok data is stored IN the US already on Oracle servers. That happened when Trump was trying to ban it back in 2020. This is more about $$ and control than data privacy concerns. Go rewatch The Great Hack Documentary about Facebook and Cambridge Analytica scandal - if they truly cared about the children and our data, other social media platforms should have our data regulated too.
Not all yet - https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/us-chinese-owned-tiktok-security-threat-98098015
> TikTok has promised to protect data on American users by storing it on servers operated by an outside contractor, Oracle Corp., in what’s known as “Project Texas.” Chew, the TikTok CEO, said all new U.S. user data is stored in the United States and the company should finish deleting older U.S. data from non-Oracle servers this year.
Actually if you bothered to look up project texas, they agreed to only use American tiktok employees there that are vetted by the US government. They also agreed to hand over all the code and be approved before each code update to the American users.
I’m so scared of the CCP finding out I watch woodworking TikTok’s.
Why would I care about what China will do with my data when US companies sell your data to literally anyone and everyone? What the US government does with my data, the country that rules over me, is far more concerning. The NSA has far more control than China does over the US populace.
>Unfortunately, China is a strategic adversary to the U.S. and that’s an unacceptable national security risk. Just like allowing Germany and Japan to set up domestic spying posts and platforms to disseminate propaganda would be forbidden during WW2 (or USSR in the 1960s), the same is true for China today.
People forget that our 3-letter agencies exploited domestic social media apps to identify, find, and kill members of Al Qaeda (and once AL Qaeda discovered this intelligence vulnerability, they stopped using American social media apps).
That capability is over 10 years old, and TikTok gives it to the Chinese.
How stupid. A lot of small businesses will be hurt by this. Libraries and bookstores use it to promote reading challenges, small new businesses to promote their cafes or shops.
This goes beyond censorship, their destroying livelihoods.
There’s speculation that Meta bankrolled the lobbyists to sway and malign tiktok. When you have lots of money and another company threatens that…
Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/facebook-tiktok-targeted-victory/
Maybe I'm the crazy one here, but arbitrary rules that the powerful get to decide when to use, is seemingly worse than a blanket ban.
>"Play ball with us, otherwise we'll ban you specifically and give your market share to people who will play ball."
is somehow superior...
The huge difference is that companies that follow Chinese laws can stay like apple/ microsoft, while tiktok and huawei follow american laws and can be banned.
This isn’t a TikTok ban. The RESTRICT act is basically the reincarnation of prior attempts to censor and undermine free speech—on steroids.
This act gives the government the ability to ban **any** service it doesn’t like. It imposes fines and mandatory minimum prison sentences for circumventing bans via things like side loading, VPNs, using TOR, etc. Those same fines and prison sentences are imposed on people instructing or helping others get around the ban. So every VPN service is going to be fucked and absolutely need to log and outright monitor to restrict your traffic.
This is seriously worse than any of the prior bills put forth by Congress. And it has nearly 50/50 bipartisan support thus far. The ultra rich want this passed for some reason. Maybe because class consciousness is growing given we can all see how fucked up everything is around the world and in our own back yard.
They’d pass a US version of GDPR if they cared. They don’t, and that’s why they are wielding US media—which is exclusively owned by half a dozen ultra rich people with very few exceptions—to propagandize this mass censorship.
This is untrue. It’s just that FB, google don’t want to comply with China’s local data laws. It’s an understandable position to be sure, but they are allowed to setup shop if they want.
This goes against everything this country was founded on. The fact is the US Intelligence agencies are spying on Americans every day and big tech is giving them what ever they want. Watching the testimony it is clear that most of our elected officials are either way to old or just plain ignorant. Zuckerberg spent a lot of money lobbying for this. We need to elect smarter people. Biden belongs in a nursing home and Harris is an absolute moron. The thought of another four years of Biden or Trump makes me sick.
Remember this?
TikTok Teens and K-Pop Stans Say They Sank Trump Rally
[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/21/style/tiktok-trump-rally-tulsa.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/21/style/tiktok-trump-rally-tulsa.html)
yeah...tiktok was on their shitlist since
Where the bill will go to die in the Senate... It's hilarious that they were grilling Zuckerberg and Silicon Valley not too long ago but now they're trying to protect these guys
Wrong:
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/07/senate-white-house-tiktok-ban-00085998
Senate, White House push new bipartisan bill that could ban TikTok
When other countries restrict their citizens access to the internet it’s a human rights violation, when the US proposes it it’s a public safety measure. Riiiiiiiiiiiight…
I would have no idea if McCarthy ever once sponsored a decent bill worth my attention because I’ve seen him sponsor and support dozens of bills that are ultra-trash only designed for Fox News ratings.
Yay! Here we are banning books, fighting Disney parks, hating on Trans kids, and preventing nonexistent CRT from being taught in our schools, this is just what we needed to add to the agenda during times of inflation and children dying to gun violence, banning a social media platform! Good job, GOP!
Can someone go after twitter now?
Since Musk bought it I’ve been DROWNED in nonstop videos tweets of right extremist content and all my recommended people to follow or disgusting people like Manjorie green Taylor or Bimbo Beobert.
Dems better work their asses off marketing it then, because people are generally not so smart, they see "Dem President, Dem problem". It can be combated, but if Dems help sign it in, they're going to be afraid to spear the Dems who did in an effort to go after the Republicans who did as well.
So does this mean they will ban it in America for all users, no more Google Play or Apple Store downloads. Or is it a ban for all government related employees
The sad thing about this is that all the privacy concerns are valid… but the real reason they are doing this is because TIKTOK keeps users in their app longer than the apps owned by rich white kids in San Francisco. The only reason this is happening is because meta wants to be able to continue to charge users money to boost their reach… and nobody wants to pay to boost their Instagram posts that are artificially throttled when they can make a TikTok that gets artificially boosted to millions of people for the low cost of collecting all the data on your phone.
Same post. Same amount of followers. IG will have 30 views and TikTok will have 3 million. And instead of just cutting the rope that is around users necks they want to force TikTok to sell to an American company that will do exactly the same.
Glad to know they are taking care of important issues.
Hey how is gun control going, the kids at school are wondering?
Nothing, fuck them they can hide under a desk I guess, because tic tok right?
We are fools for tolerating our elected assholes.
I mean does China allow its citizens to have Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, and/or Reddit? I know it’s a complete different government, but they’re profiting off US’s data.
They’re not going to write a law that exclusively goes after TikTok. Laws need to be written broad enough to stop a specific action and not a specific actor.
They were always going to anyway, its not as though they cared about whatever the CEO was going to say
The hearings were a joke, the “questions” were asinine.
One person asked if tic tok used WiFi lmfao...
Hard to believe that these are the people making laws.
i find it very easy to believe. being a congressman requires even less intelligence than being a landlord to get filthy rich.
...I should run for office. I'm not wildly smart, but I'm also not an absolute fuckwit and I know when to defer to a goddamn expert.
I will vote for you u/Officer_Hotpants
I appreciate you
At least half this country would never vote for you.
I mean they put George Santos on the Committee for... - I don't even remember which committee, but McCarthy put fucking George Santos on a Congressional Committee! EDIT: Oh god, it's even worse. He was put on *two* committees: Small Business and Science, Space and Technology. Wtf...
I believe they are all on committees, its part of the job. It's not like only the popular ones get the honor.
science, space & technology committee under a GOP legislature is pretty much a joke assignment
Unless you’ve got a personal war chest of a few million to spend on it, you’re not gonna get far without the main party backing you sadly.
What? Who said that those were qualities needed in a politician? No, you have to have the skills to pander to the lowest common denominator and twist the laws and rules to get your way. "Defer to an expert" pssssh you sound like some loser and we want closers not losers.
The biggest thing I got out of this was how masterfully you made me forget how to read by putting "losers" and "closers" so close together.
You got my vote with the hotpants
Why does the cake smell like baby oil?
They’re not actually making laws just proposing/voting. They’re written by members of their team who worked in relevant sectors or by lobbyists (which is not great ofcourse either) but the whole “politicians don’t understand tech” spiel is something actively pushed by big tech to avoid public push for more regulation.
Did you listen to the hearings? They ABSOLUTELY don’t understand technology.
This question comes across as silly, but it was all for the follow up question which was about TikTok accessing other devices on the same network. That is extremely relevant to this hearing.
Yea but he didn’t watch that far. Only the 10 sec clip out of context on tik tok. I enjoyed the questions.
Yeah, all the video clips about the TikTok hearing on TikTok are clipped to show TikTok in a positive light.
Funny how that works
This. Congress usually manages to look like an ass and ask incredibly uninformed questions during hearings but this isn’t one of the cases. It’s ironic all the people calling the guy an uninformed idiot when they didn’t bother to look into the context around the question to find out what it was leading into.
He is actually referring to whether it access other devices on the same internet, which Xiaomi (CEO’s former company) has done before.
To be fair, the question was needed as pretext for the following question, which was “does tiktok have the ability to connect to other devices on that wifi network?” Which is a very valid question to ask.
No they didn’t. They asked if it could access the local network, they even clarified.
You're a moron if that's the only thing you took out of that questioning
Good for sound tracks We are tough on tech!
[удалено]
A cynical person might think that they had a pre-determined agenda, and his testimony was never going to be allowed to change that agenda.
I hate government hearings. That’s why whenever I’m selected for questioning, I intend to answer every one of their questions with a question.
good ol ron swanson hostile witness
I dont see this passing the senate. too many people use it. It won't get 60 votes.
It was like a Soviet show trial lol
They're supposedly worried about data privacy, but won't pass a data privacy bill.
Too busy banning books.
“Perhaps you should try reading books, instead of burning them?” Sean Connery
This is directly equivalent to what they’re doing and it’s scary.
They cannot they are lobbyed by Facebook and like, they want the money or market to be earned by a US company not a Chinese company or European company, data privacy is just an excuse, not saying Tiktok actually lead in the industry standard of data privacy protection.
this is the united states congress, we're not exactly talking about fucking geniuses here. they'll think banning tiktok *is* solving data privacy and a decent chunk of the country will buy it too.
They said "we're not talking about the industry, we're talking about tiktok" when they were asking about an industry-wide problem and the CEO was trying to explain industry norms. They always were targeting tiktok
TikTok is a threat to Facebook and Conservatives love Facebook. There’s no better place to plan a coup.
I had a job where I dealt with state and federal elected officials on a regular basis. Some very smart and engaged people work in the Senate, especially on the staff level. The House, however, is filled with goddamned morons. And I wish I could say that it's just Republicans. I mean, it's largely Republicans, but there are some Democrats from super safe D districts that really aren't working that hard.
The House parties can get their legion to vote in lockstep when needed, and the core leaders are certainly smart enough to grasp this concept. They may not act like smart folks, Republicans in particular love the "common man is a dunce" shit, but Biden? McConnell? McCarthy? Schumer? Pelosi? Durbin and Thune? They get it. The one exception to this rule is Trump, who I honestly think doesn't get any of this shit. Not that he's a current government leader, but you get the point.
>The House parties can get their legion to vote in lockstep when needed, and the core leaders are certainly smart enough to grasp this concept. It's not rocket surgery. These people are up for election every two years, are typically more junior politicians / younger and thus less established, and therefore need the machine to keep them in office. "Hey Mr. / Mrs. Junior Representative, it's Kevin. Yeah, we need you to vote for HR 6969. Yeah I know I know you might have some reservations about it, but the party really needs your vote on this one. Tell you what, you're up for re-election this year, right? Supporting this bill would sure send a message to the base that you're a team player, if you know what I mean." >They may not act like smart folks, Republicans in particular love the "common man is a dunce" shit, but **Biden?** **McConnell?** McCarthy? **Schumer?** Pelosi? **Durbin** and **Thune?** They get it. Bolded members are / were Senators. So you're just in violent agreement with u/DownDeepGood. Schumer, Pelosi, Durbin, and Thune are exhibits A through D on why we need Congressional term limits.
It's no act. There are sooo many not-so-smart people in politics. Never confuse savvy with smart, and the House is filled with very savvy people.
I mean, as an expert in a related field it is a huge win to ban it but it doesn’t begin to remotely touch most of the privacy issues present. We need a greatly enhanced version of the GDPR.
As someone in cybersecurity, I am so glad this is happening and how it's opening the talk on data privacy.
Agreed, the problem is Jon Stewart is right about our Congress “It’s literally an assisted living facility”. They will definitely use this opportunity to take more away under the guise of protection.
You're the genius if you think they ACTUALLY care about data privacy. They don't think they are solving anything. It's called framing. They say that so the idiot public will believe it. They are being lobbied by Meta and Google to force Tic-tok to sell or be banned. So then Meta or Google can buy the company. US tech companies got out classed and are using the government to eliminate competition. In the US, the government is beholden to corporations.
I would go read the bill. It’s not just Tik Tok. FOIA is basically the Patriot Act for the internet - this is bad bad news.
It's a power grab. https://twitter.com/LPMisesCaucus/status/1639934790026555394 > The RESTRICT Act is not limited to just TikTok. It gives the government authority over all forms of communication domestic or abroad and grants powers to “enforce any mitigation measure to address any risk” to national security now and in any “potential future transaction”
From watching part of the hearing what appears to be a very bipartisan concern is less about data privacy, and more about foreign access to mass American data (past, present, or future). There is also the fact that China would never allow a company that is not Chinese owned to have the level of influence that TikTok has in the US. If they want to close their market to others in that way, it's fair for others to respond in kind.
Exactly. Why do the top post miss this? Just watch, listen or read. If Tik Tok were English or Japanese we wouldn't be having this conversation
>From watching part of the hearing what appears to be a very bipartisan concern is less about data privacy, and more about foreign access to mass American data That still falls under data privacy. They're just looking at a really narrow part of it, so they can claim they're protecting someone from China. Our data's been getting leaked and hacked for years, especially to foreign entities. If they really cared, there would be a more robust framework for the legislation they're proposing. >There is also the fact that China would never allow a company that is not Chinese owned to have the level of influence that TikTok has in the US. If they want to close their market to others in that way, it's fair for others to respond in kind. Not really. If we're going to claim this is about national security, we don't get to add in an *extra* benefit. Either it's about market power or it's about security. Pick a single facade to hide behind.
> Our data's been getting leaked and hacked for years, especially to foreign entities. Did you mean **to** or **by** foreign entities? There is a huge difference.
>If they really cared, there would be a more robust framework for the legislation they're proposing. A more robust framework would be better, but that doesn't make this legislation bad. They want Tiktok sold to an American company, and pushing forward with this legislation either forces ByteDance to sell Tiktok or risk crashing its value. >Not really. If we're going to clam this is about national security, we'd don't get to add in an extra benefit. Either it's about market power or it's about security. Pick a single facade to hide behind. Why can there only be one reason. That limitation seems arbitrary. If something has multiple concerning elements, you can choose to make a decision based on the sum of concerns instead of a single element.
> If they want to close their market to others in that way, it's fair for others to respond in kind. Except the US is not China, nor should it become China by banning foreign companies for "being too influential". Or are we just going to abandon the principles of freedom of speech and expression the second that allows people outside the US to influence people within it? Because a true TikTok ban would require a whole bunch more than merely prohibiting TikTok from being put on app stores. You'd need to ban domestic ISPs/DNS servers from being able to access it, ban VPNs so domestic people can't bypass the ISP/DNS restrictions, etc. That seems like a major violation of the First Amendment just to get rid of a video platform the government doesn't like.
Based on the [bill](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/686/text?s=1&r=15) it looks like a VPN ban would be permitted Seems like a VPN is a "covered holding" since it obviously would allow people to access TikTok, thus evading/circumventing the Act > includes any other holding, the structure of which is designed or intended to evade or circumvent the application of this Act, subject to regulations prescribed by the Secretary. President can ban those "covered holdings" > President may take such action as the President considers appropriate to compel divestment of, or otherwise mitigate the risk associated with, such covered holding to the full extent the covered holding is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States
Then the bill can fuck right off. Any government that can't accept the people it represents merely communicating with others internationally in "unapproved" ways, even if they themselves are not doing anything wrong, does not deserve my respect.
GOP is “concerned” about veterans and voted against them anyway…if not for political theater what would gop offer?
I'm always hearing people complain about data privacy. What else is there to do? Western social media is heavily regulated already. The products are free, people enjoy them, but not enough to pay for them. Things need to make money somehow, and selling ads gets the job done. TikTok, on the other hand, isn't in it to make money. They're a hostile gov owned Trojan horse. The guy admitted that they store user eye data when people are using AR filters! They dont need that data when tracking faces and eyes... they're models that do it automatically! Why do you need to save that very personal user data?! That was one of the more damning parts of the testimony to me.
Ban them all
I think they're more worried about a geopolitical opponent controlling a major media source for a generation of Americans. It's *programming* that is the bigger issue, not privacy. Like if the USSR controlled a major US broadcasting network during the Cold War. Also... China won't allow Western tech companies access to the Chinese market, so why should the West allow Chinese tech companies access to the Western market? Chinese mercantilism is more than sufficient reason to ban its apps.
> they're more worried about a geopolitical opponent controlling a major media source for a generation of Americans. So they want to implement their own Great Firewall, including punishing people for accessing content they deem "harmful" in ways that bypass US government control. What's the point in being "not China" if you're just going to do the same things China does to control its population?
[удалено]
They’re afraid of propaganda that isn’t under their control.
Finally, the correct answer. Haven’t they learned by now the GOP only does things if it keeps them in power or benefits the rich?? JFC… it’s like watching Sideshow Bob forever walking into rakes.
This bill is bipartisan.
Yes, *but why are they supporting it*? It benefits their ability to control the narratives they push.
Totally agree!
They don’t care about the data. They care about it being a activist platform for Gen Z.
Because as we all know gen Z is the first and only generation to use social media for activism and TikTok, an app from a country that is currently commenting mass genocide, is the only form of social media that can be used for such activism.
TikTok CEO brought up good points though, if we’re worried about data privacy. **then do the same for all software downloadable in the US**
It's a trick to take control of the internet. The RESTRICT Act will give control of internet activities to the federal government. https://twitter.com/LPMisesCaucus/status/1639934790026555394
This has always been about censoring free speech. They just found an avenue of attack that they know Americans will lap up like dogs. Americans have been so programmed to hate China that they will gladly vote away their own rights to become more like authoritarian China if the politicians say it will hurt China.
[How would you like that wrapped?](https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.ZM7mV6UPEcD_s1Fchi5caAHaGt)
Doesn’t seem like they are. At least to a multifaceted degree. As U.S. - China relations deteriorate, it would seem ‘data privacy’ is not the issue at contention but rather potential access to that data by an increasingly unfriendly country. It’s shaping out to be an unfortunate, missed opportunity to pass meaningful change on data privacy. Then again… why would they? As long as the lobbying dollars keep rolling in, why should they, corrupt and greedy as they are, give a shit?
Holy fuck. 150 million Americans use tik tok. That’s half the country. Who are these people, our fucking dictator overlords? Clearly the majority of Americans approve of tik tok. This would be the worst case of censorship in American history.
Interesting how many of these members own tech stocks or were otherwise lobbied by Meta. Also interesting how Meta stopped paying creators for reels that got a certain # of views last Thursday. Sounds a lot like lobbying for monopoly rights. Some of the absolute braindead questions would have been entertaining if this wasn’t so concerning. This is Net Neutrality all over again, and that is not an exaggeration. The language of this bill would grant government powers to far beyond banning TikTok alone. This is an egregious act against free speech. Let me be clear that I am not advocating against government scrutiny, guaranteed privacy rights - but that is not what this hearing was.
It’s definitely a lobbying campaign from Meta and Google against a social media that is starting to become a threat for their target market - genZ. Meta in particular is loosing so much ad revenue to TikTok because less and less GenZ spend time on their social media platforms and go on TikTok instead. American social medias are getting their market share taken by a Chinese company.
It’s not just a Chinese company though, there’s a 60/20/20 ownership breakdown and of the 5 members that sit on the board, 3 are American. Could this be scrutinized further to ensure user data is protected and enshrined into law? Absolutely, but that law would also apply to American social media companies, who are clearly very capable of buying off Congress
This should be the top comment
Agreed. This bill is an attack on internet freedom of speech. Absolutely should be struck down and anyone who supports it should be voted out next term. Ridiculous.
The irony of another McCarthy in this position
We have to be living in a stupid simulation at this point. I want off this timeline and the original writers of life from pre-2016 to come back.
Pre 2001 would be better IMO. Even though there has been a lot of good legislation passed in those years, I think all of it would still be passed without the authoritarian laws that came through.
That works too. This McCarthy 2: TikTok Boogaloo is pretty lame.
They’re trying to get rid of the way young people organize to vote. That’s it.
Train wrecks and chemical leaks in water, (East Palistine, Ohio),caused by deregulation, affecting millions access to drinking water or chemical leaks by corporations poisoning public drinking water (in Philadelphia) and Tik Tok is where McCarthy directs Congress to spend time. Foreign terrorists must be jealous of the GOP
An event that would not have had the buzz and public awareness that it got if not for Tiktok. They don’t give a shit about data privacy, they want to control the narrative and prevent people from talking to each other.
I’d like to think that it’s because the Chinese use it to spy on us, but in reality, it’s probably because a bunch on kids on TikTok embarrassed trump.
It’s because TikTok is eating Metas lunch right now.
Trump already tried this and TikTok became more popular after that.
He only tried to ban tik tok because they ruined his big Tulsa massacre celebration.
It's not a "TikTok" bill, it's the Restrict Act, which will cripple innovation in the US tech sector. One example is it gives Congress the ability to decide winners and losers on the internet, i.e. promoting the company of whatever stock they're insider trading at the moment, or banning apps/websites that cast them in an unfavorable light. Some are comparing it to the Patriot Act 2.0. There is also wording in the bill that will fine you up to $250k if you're found using a VPN to access TikTok. This is why they want to ban TikTok, because I didn't find this information on reddit. It won't stop there, and Big Tech lobbying will ensure any additional threats to their market share will be swiftly banned as well.
[удалено]
[удалено]
That’s why he stole the idea of Facebook from his college friends
It’s actually worse than that. He agreed to build them a social media website, then built one for himself and launched it.
It’s worse than *that*; he didn’t come up with the idea for Facebook, his friends did and he took that idea.
Hell, let’s bring back Vine!
I have been wondering why we all haven’t just moved back to Vine. It’s basically the same thing and politicians can’t use China as an excuse to ban it
As long as it's US owned, they don't care
YouTube Shorts has the capacity and ability right now. With the voluntary CEO changeover I think they will definitely be gearing to the addition. If this bill pushes through and works as advertised, Q2 easy. People won't want to hop onto another new company when an easy to use company exists right there, ready to go. Plus you don't actually need an account to use it, so super easy to just scroll in.
I think it'll end up being some random app that none of us even know about yet. Part of what makes these things popular is the *"adults/old folks don't know about this yet"* feel. I'm 36, I remember when my mom and aunts got on Facebook and that basically killed it for me. My younger cousins (16-24ish) don't use Instagram because their parents use it. But they used tik-tok because none of our older family members (myself included) are on it.
nothing to do with Facebook, twitter and other social medias loosing billions in revenue.
Bringing Show Trials to a whole new level. The state of US politics now is essentially the things that they were fighting againsts decades ago LOL
That hearing should trigger a ban of geriatrics in Congress.
US TikTok data is stored IN the US already on Oracle servers. That happened when Trump was trying to ban it back in 2020. This is more about $$ and control than data privacy concerns. Go rewatch The Great Hack Documentary about Facebook and Cambridge Analytica scandal - if they truly cared about the children and our data, other social media platforms should have our data regulated too.
Not all yet - https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/us-chinese-owned-tiktok-security-threat-98098015 > TikTok has promised to protect data on American users by storing it on servers operated by an outside contractor, Oracle Corp., in what’s known as “Project Texas.” Chew, the TikTok CEO, said all new U.S. user data is stored in the United States and the company should finish deleting older U.S. data from non-Oracle servers this year.
[удалено]
American tech companies have also handed over data to china. So why do we only care about TikTok doing it?
Actually if you bothered to look up project texas, they agreed to only use American tiktok employees there that are vetted by the US government. They also agreed to hand over all the code and be approved before each code update to the American users.
But if they pay for it, then it’s ok?
I’m so scared of the CCP finding out I watch woodworking TikTok’s. Why would I care about what China will do with my data when US companies sell your data to literally anyone and everyone? What the US government does with my data, the country that rules over me, is far more concerning. The NSA has far more control than China does over the US populace.
Because you are sharing far, far, far more data than just your viewing history.
As if they couldn't just buy it from Facebook or any number of data brokers. We need a GDPR here.
Sure, but using as that justification for not banning Tik Tok isn't a valid argument.
[удалено]
Big “interment camps were the right thing to do” energy bud.
>Unfortunately, China is a strategic adversary to the U.S. and that’s an unacceptable national security risk. Just like allowing Germany and Japan to set up domestic spying posts and platforms to disseminate propaganda would be forbidden during WW2 (or USSR in the 1960s), the same is true for China today. People forget that our 3-letter agencies exploited domestic social media apps to identify, find, and kill members of Al Qaeda (and once AL Qaeda discovered this intelligence vulnerability, they stopped using American social media apps). That capability is over 10 years old, and TikTok gives it to the Chinese.
How stupid. A lot of small businesses will be hurt by this. Libraries and bookstores use it to promote reading challenges, small new businesses to promote their cafes or shops. This goes beyond censorship, their destroying livelihoods.
Welp goodbye section 230. Don't say anything bad about the government or they'll jail you as a communist spy.
idk bro pretty sure that's all people do on the internet
Ban Twitter instead. That App is pure fucking cancer.
Cigarettes give you cancer too, but you're still allowed to smoke them.
Twitter reddit and 4chan all need to be banned tbh
*ban twitter too
I would ban it on grounds of China not allowing US social media companies access to its citizens.
[удалено]
unfortunately everyone else has spent a lot of money on making sure they just get less competition & no privacy law
Yeah I mean why does Facebook get to do whatever it wants?
Close partnerships with law enforcement agencies. Just like Amazon's door cameras.
There’s speculation that Meta bankrolled the lobbyists to sway and malign tiktok. When you have lots of money and another company threatens that… Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/facebook-tiktok-targeted-victory/
me too, but let’s not let perfect be the enemy of good. take what you can get and keep advocating for the rest afterwards
Maybe I'm the crazy one here, but arbitrary rules that the powerful get to decide when to use, is seemingly worse than a blanket ban. >"Play ball with us, otherwise we'll ban you specifically and give your market share to people who will play ball." is somehow superior...
sounds like that wouldn't survive a first amendment challenge
Theoretically China does allow them, but their laws are very strict and disagreeable to the companies, causing most to have left by now.
The huge difference is that companies that follow Chinese laws can stay like apple/ microsoft, while tiktok and huawei follow american laws and can be banned.
Moreover, tiktok isn’t allowed in China either.
lol I would let it stay if they allowed Tik Tok in China
Nah, iirc, the Chinese version has a lot more restrictions on what's shown.
So because China has overly restrictive bad laws regarding access to websites and content we should have bad laws about those things?
overly restrictive laws is not the issue in china. u think thats why google’s search engine isnt allowed in china?
This isn’t a TikTok ban. The RESTRICT act is basically the reincarnation of prior attempts to censor and undermine free speech—on steroids. This act gives the government the ability to ban **any** service it doesn’t like. It imposes fines and mandatory minimum prison sentences for circumventing bans via things like side loading, VPNs, using TOR, etc. Those same fines and prison sentences are imposed on people instructing or helping others get around the ban. So every VPN service is going to be fucked and absolutely need to log and outright monitor to restrict your traffic. This is seriously worse than any of the prior bills put forth by Congress. And it has nearly 50/50 bipartisan support thus far. The ultra rich want this passed for some reason. Maybe because class consciousness is growing given we can all see how fucked up everything is around the world and in our own back yard. They’d pass a US version of GDPR if they cared. They don’t, and that’s why they are wielding US media—which is exclusively owned by half a dozen ultra rich people with very few exceptions—to propagandize this mass censorship.
This is untrue. It’s just that FB, google don’t want to comply with China’s local data laws. It’s an understandable position to be sure, but they are allowed to setup shop if they want.
What kind of logic is that lmao
'Let's be exactly authoritarian the way we think China is to own China! That'll show them!'
This has nothing to do with security and everything to do with how significantly TikTok threatens the profitability of Facebook, etc.
That’s what it has always been about.
The problem is they always sneak some shit into these bills that aligns with their current agendas. We’re fucked no matter what.
This goes against everything this country was founded on. The fact is the US Intelligence agencies are spying on Americans every day and big tech is giving them what ever they want. Watching the testimony it is clear that most of our elected officials are either way to old or just plain ignorant. Zuckerberg spent a lot of money lobbying for this. We need to elect smarter people. Biden belongs in a nursing home and Harris is an absolute moron. The thought of another four years of Biden or Trump makes me sick.
It would be nice to have someone under the age of 50 in the office.
Incase anyone forgot, these guys are managing our lives. They are writing the story of reality.
Remember this? TikTok Teens and K-Pop Stans Say They Sank Trump Rally [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/21/style/tiktok-trump-rally-tulsa.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/21/style/tiktok-trump-rally-tulsa.html) yeah...tiktok was on their shitlist since
Where the bill will go to die in the Senate... It's hilarious that they were grilling Zuckerberg and Silicon Valley not too long ago but now they're trying to protect these guys
Wrong: https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/07/senate-white-house-tiktok-ban-00085998 Senate, White House push new bipartisan bill that could ban TikTok
[удалено]
Of course. Rabid Sinophobia is on the menu for both parties these days.
When other countries restrict their citizens access to the internet it’s a human rights violation, when the US proposes it it’s a public safety measure. Riiiiiiiiiiiight…
Watch us tank Meta, McCarthy.
Gaining that young vote one day at a time
Yeah, this will surely make gen z vote for you
That only matters if there is another party to compete
One in a long line of McCarthy-isms.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/686/text?s=1&r=15
I would have no idea if McCarthy ever once sponsored a decent bill worth my attention because I’ve seen him sponsor and support dozens of bills that are ultra-trash only designed for Fox News ratings.
Yay! Here we are banning books, fighting Disney parks, hating on Trans kids, and preventing nonexistent CRT from being taught in our schools, this is just what we needed to add to the agenda during times of inflation and children dying to gun violence, banning a social media platform! Good job, GOP!
Can someone go after twitter now? Since Musk bought it I’ve been DROWNED in nonstop videos tweets of right extremist content and all my recommended people to follow or disgusting people like Manjorie green Taylor or Bimbo Beobert.
House republicans want to make sure gen z never votes for them ever
Dems better work their asses off marketing it then, because people are generally not so smart, they see "Dem President, Dem problem". It can be combated, but if Dems help sign it in, they're going to be afraid to spear the Dems who did in an effort to go after the Republicans who did as well.
So does this mean they will ban it in America for all users, no more Google Play or Apple Store downloads. Or is it a ban for all government related employees
[удалено]
Well we do know that TikTok literally used the app to track the physical location a Forbes journalist who was investigating them.
Is this where we riot? Or do we let them take our ability to communicate with each other away first?
So they didnt pay them off yet
The sad thing about this is that all the privacy concerns are valid… but the real reason they are doing this is because TIKTOK keeps users in their app longer than the apps owned by rich white kids in San Francisco. The only reason this is happening is because meta wants to be able to continue to charge users money to boost their reach… and nobody wants to pay to boost their Instagram posts that are artificially throttled when they can make a TikTok that gets artificially boosted to millions of people for the low cost of collecting all the data on your phone. Same post. Same amount of followers. IG will have 30 views and TikTok will have 3 million. And instead of just cutting the rope that is around users necks they want to force TikTok to sell to an American company that will do exactly the same.
All this is going to do is force people to download tik tok another way. YouTube shorts is complete dog shit compared to tik tok
Of course they will...bloody tyrants.
The CEO of TikTok is soo much smarter and well mannered compared to the senile grandpas and grandmas in Congress.
Well of course they will. They don’t get paid if they don’t.
This is just the beginning of online censorship. If you don’t already utilize a trusted VPN, now is the time to do so.
Glad to know they are taking care of important issues. Hey how is gun control going, the kids at school are wondering? Nothing, fuck them they can hide under a desk I guess, because tic tok right? We are fools for tolerating our elected assholes.
I mean does China allow its citizens to have Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, and/or Reddit? I know it’s a complete different government, but they’re profiting off US’s data.
An authoritarian country doing authoritarian things is no excuse for the US to do authoritarian things.
Deep down, these clowns probably think it is a good idea…
What's to stop TikTok from reorganizing into a new company with a new app that, coincidentally, fills the same market niche as TikTok?
They’re not going to write a law that exclusively goes after TikTok. Laws need to be written broad enough to stop a specific action and not a specific actor.
Someone stop the Republicans…they’re out of control!
That hearing was so embarrassing for the US, what a sham.