• bartolomeo@suppo.fi
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    112
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    8 months ago

    Crazy that the proposed solution to propaganda is banning media instead of investing in education that promotes critical thinking. Or maybe the idea here is “no propaganda except mine”.

    • Stupidmanager@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Investing in education is counter to the clear goals of the USA. Smart people would revolt, protest,and you know, hold companies and billionaires accountable. Uneducated people are often poor, can’t afford to fight back and are scared they will lose what little they have.

      At some point we need all to fight back, but it might be too late. And worse, too few will join in out of fear of death.

    • masquenox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      If people can pick apart China’s propaganda it means they can pick apart US propaganda, too.

      Can’t have that.

    • SolNine@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I have to tell you, I know many intelligent people that have succumbed to propaganda, and outrage porn addiction. I see it continue to happen on all sides of the political isle. (This isn’t a both sides kind of statement, simply acknowledgement that the same tactics work on our brain, indifferent of political ideology.)

      Whether they are hooked on the dopamine rush of rage baiting up votes, likes or comments; or only seeing everything in the world through a myopic lens of negativity, it has captured many of my friends and family, including myself for a time.

      For some their drug is Fox News, others it’s Reddit, Facebook or TikTok, the results are often the same.

      I have yet to figure out a manner in which to communicate with individuals who spend considerable amounts of time in echo chambers, constantly having their personal beliefs reinforced. Evasion of cognitive dissonance and social conflict are very powerful psychological motivations. I wish I knew the solution.

    • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      What do you think billionaires are bribing congress for? Regulatory capture keeps all the competitors out. Whereas actually fixing the problem of social media brainwashing would cost them money.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      8 months ago

      And yet China is banning basically the whole Western internet, foreign companies must enter joint ventures with Chinese companies under government control. Reciprocity is fair. Why should Byte Dance be allowed to take in billions to fund Chinese gulags?

        • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          8 months ago

          At least the US government can’t harvest US citizens social media data without a warrant (excepting all the patriot act stuff). But there is zero protection for your data from the CCP if it’s on TikTok. That’s understandably a pretty huge security concern. I can also understand China not wanting data from their citizens in the hands of American social media companies. Idk if any if it is good or bad but it’s certainly common sense on a national level.

      • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        As someone who’s neither chinese nor american I want nothing more than these countries to keep their hands to themselves. I don’t like China doing it, and I don’t want the US doing it because China does it. Are y’all gonna hand a piece of your companies to every country they operate in? I’m guessing “no”.

      • OftenWrong@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Why do you want our social media to mirror China? That’s the real question. What’s the US gonna do with our data that’s so much better? Oh yeah, fund our allies genocides! Yay! 🥳

        • woelkchen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Why do you want our social media to mirror China? That’s the real question.

          I want Chinese companies face exactly the same hurdles in the west as western companies face in China. Applies to all economic branches, not just social media.

          Oh yeah, fund our allies genocides! Yay! 🥳

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

          • OftenWrong@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            In what way is taking a platform away from millions of Americans an acceptable way to do that? Yes, our taxes are funding a genocide and instead of listening to the droves of people protesting that they suddenly all get together and magically agree to ban tiktok. They can’t agree to feed school children but still agreed to ban TikTok. The fact that you see it as retaliation is also hilarious because that’s supposed to be illegal and they’re still claiming that’s not why they’re doing it. Even you see through that bullshit on accident

            Everything I said was relevant to my point. You linked the wiki to whataboutism and still used it wrong lmaooooo.

    • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      8 months ago

      You could argue that the perceptions of TikTok as a CCP tool of propaganda is an indirect foreign aid to Taiwan

      God knows how much Russia tries to use social media to turn sentiments against Ukraine

      Ultimately I think short form content encouraging platforms at large need to go down anyways so sucker punching the current biggest offender is right by me!

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        The only thing I’ve seen about Taiwan on TikTok are videos talking about just how bad China’s casualty rate would be if they tried anything.

      • OftenWrong@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Facebook literally conducted social experiments on a million of their own users and didn’t even get a slap on the wrist. Banning TikTok had absolutely nothing to do with security or stopping propaganda. Anyone that thinks otherwise is a gullible fool.

      • K3zi4@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        8 months ago

        Short form content platforms aren’t going anywhere, Instagram Reels and YouTube shorts are just a carbon copy of tiktok. No problems with them, of course, because they’re American.

        • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          I was against banning TikTok despite never having even used it. I still think the fact that’s it’s CCP controlled is a valid point so I get why this doesn’t affect reels or shorts but I still think it’s naive to ignore them. They’re bad for mental health and political division the exact same way TikTok is and just like TikTok there are foreign countries using them for propaganda purposes just aswell.

          • OftenWrong@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            The propaganda really isn’t anything different or special though. I’ve been using TikTok for years and it’s no different than any other social media. You interact with what you’re interested in and so you see what you want to see. Just like lemmy and reddit and whatever else. I’d argue that TikTok is a bit better for not having US corporate fingers all over it tbh.

            If propaganda is valid criticism of the way our government is behaving by our own citizens on their own channels then I guess you could call it that lol. But banning TikTok is already proof that our government is full of fuckery and not working for us. They tried twice before this and the people unequivocally said NO both times. So they shoved it through in a way that makes it more difficult for anyone to hold them accountable. Because of course they did. Even people that don’t like the idea of TikTok should be more like you and against this obvious power grab. They don’t want to protect us. They want our data back in the US markets and our eyes back on our own homegrown propaganda that they can control. It really is outrageous if you consider it at anything more than surface level.

        • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          If only TikTok were paying ALEC and using their cycle-of-rage algorithm to drive gamers to Ben Shapiro. Gotta pay protection money to the mob if you want a business in this neighborhood.

    • postnataldrip@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yup and that is the same issue with elections. Candidate A wants to ban private jets and burn tyres, candidate B wants to legalise child labour. A wins then claims they have a mandate to burn tyres

      • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        And they also don’t ban the private jets. I’d really love to have national legislation that a shithead can be recalled from any position if enough citizens demand it.

    • OftenWrong@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      It was attached because they already tried twice with it as a single issue and lost both times. They forced it through to get their way despite a clear message from the people that they didn’t want this. It’s so laughably anti-democratic but a lot of the older folks here don’t care because it fits their bias of TikTok bad. At the end of the day democracy gets shit on once again because small minded people are easily manipulated into hating something they don’t understand.

  • Zap@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Minimum wage has been $7.25/hr for 15 years and this is what they’re getting done on Capitol Hill 🤪

    • Nom Nom@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      They don’t care about every corporation because they work with those corporations. It’s because it’s a foreign power that started doing the same shit they’ve been doing for decades now. None of these countries & corporations deserve any sort of sympathy or support from any sane individual.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      mimes eating popcorn, while pointing to overlayed captions, with a Taylor Swift song playing in the background

    • douglasg14b@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      It’s not even “banning tik-tok”. It’s “separate your interests, or we block your product”.

      Which isn’t exactly something that we haven’t seen before in the U.S. and it for sure isn’t anything new in China where plenty of services, games…etc are blocked with “Chinese only” versions of those services.

          • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            It’s literally the exact same thing being done to a different app. It’s not a wild comparison.

            • OftenWrong@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              The apps themselves are wildly different. You think it’s a coincidence that this got forced through right before elections? Our gov doesn’t like that they can’t control the narrative there. They also really don’t like how upset tiktok makes the US corporations that fill their pockets. How is that comparable? Unless you think the ban is for security like they’re claiming, which is laughable, because it’s so obviously not.

      • OftenWrong@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        It’s a ban. They have stated in no uncertain terms that they will not sell or separate any interests. It’s not for our “security” or any of that absolute BS either. It’s for their own profits and because they want people’s data.

        The fact that you’d want our media to even remotely resemble the highly sensored versions in China is insane to me. Y’all are just happy to go along with this because you don’t like tiktok. That’s it. That’s all it took for a lot of you. I’d say I expected better but it’s becoming more obvious every day that lemmy is where the old and out of touch people migrated to. Despite it seeming like it would be the opposite.

        You genuinely don’t care if the government oversteps as long as it fits your bias. The fact that they couldn’t get it to go through as a single issue twice so they had to shove it with other issues just to get their way should be enough to piss most people off but here we are. It’s a shame. I’m disappointed in how easily manipulated so many of you are. Truly.

        • sailingbythelee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          I haven’t followed it too closely, but I know this has been years in the making so the company should have a contingency plan. You have to wonder why the company refuses to take steps satisfactory to Congress to ensure that the CCP cannot access user data or influence the content or algorithm. It is economically suicidal to be banned in the US, which makes me think that Bytedance’s CCP masters told the company to refuse. Of course, now that the law has been passed, Bytedance will have to separate their interests since I doubt they’ll allow the app to be banned. They’d lose most of their advertising revenue if they were banned in the US. Not to mention the fact that a US ban would likely be followed by bans in other countries. I’m sure Bytedance can find a way to have another company manage their data while still making plenty of money. No need to pity a company making billions in revenue on the labour of content creators.

          • OftenWrong@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            They can’t really have a contingency because they won’t sell. They can’t due to the laws there anyway. It’s been plainly stated countless times. We’ll see how it goes but regardless the US gov is playing dirty here under the guise of protecting our security. The people clearly said no the first two times and they shoved it through anyway. I don’t see how people don’t find that at least a little alarming

            • sailingbythelee@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              You make a good point about Bytedance perhaps not being permitted to have a contingency plan. However, the CCP may have one. Whatever Xi says is law in China.

              • OftenWrong@startrek.website
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                And he’s said that companies can’t sell property like the TikTok algorithm to other countries. I highly doubt he’ll suddenly have a change of heart now. I honestly hope he doesn’t because the US shouldn’t be making legislation against its own citizens wishes just to fuck with China in the first place.

                • sailingbythelee@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Why do you say that Congress is making legislation against its own citizens’ wishes? A quick Google search shows that polls suggest that twice as many Americans favour the ban as oppose it.

                  I’m still trying to figure out what the downside of this legislation is. It doesn’t ban any specific content or speech, it just bans a particular company from operating a specific platform in the US. Tiktok is still permitted to operate if it is controlled by a company that isn’t directly subject to the CCP. If Xi chooses to not let that happen, that is on him. Xi certainly can’t cry foul without massive hypocrisy, given that he has already banned virtually all western social media.

        • daltotron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          I’d say I expected better but it’s becoming more obvious every day that lemmy is where the old and out of touch people migrated to.

          No yeah this whole deal is like. Just a bunch of mildly liberal gen X Linux users, basically, that think they’re hot shit because they were right about like half of their opinions like a decade ago and haven’t changed since. The amount of people hating on even basic shit like discord here is nuts.

          Get with the times, grandpa, we all use pirated windows LTSC with Microsoft activation scripts and various privacy and installation scripts! C’mon! We all use YouTube revanced grandpa! Libtube? What the fuck are you talking about?

        • MalachaiConstant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          it’s becoming more obvious every day that lemmy is where the old and out of touch people migrated to

          Hey I’ve heard there’s this really cool app for lipsyncing and dancing. Apparently it’s getting pretty popular. Sounds like you’d have more fun there

      • nexguy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        They are not banning the content type that tiktok provides, they are banning the foreign authoritarian government control of American user information. If Bytedance Sells tiktok to a business in a non authoritarian state then they no longer care.

    • ours@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Except they would be ignoring all the other shitty social networks but it’s a start.

      • PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        It’s not a start tho, it’s killing competition of Facebook and Google. It’s consolidating power if anything. I believe this bill has nothing to do with security issues and everything to do with campaign contributions to make sure America never has to compete with another country in this space.

      • Raiderkev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        8 months ago

        Feeding data to the CCP, helping them identify people who can be easily swayed into espionage. Say someone gets into a position of power. “Hey, remember when you were 12 and said this on tik Tok? Now we need you to be out bitch or we’re leaking this.”

        Look at the things that have gone viral on Tik Tok, it’s like their algorithm prioritizes things that are toxic to make American youth shittier. Kia boys comes to mind.

        There is also the fact that China bans all American social media out of fear that we’d use it to manipulate their people. If they aren’t allowing our businesses to compete fairly, why should we allow theirs? Also, they probably are projecting that fear because they are doing exactly that with TikTok.

        The app has more permissions than most apps and is highly invasive. They sent a push notification to all their users based on Geo location saying who their rep was and giving their phone number saying to call them to stop this bill. That alone seems like a major abuse of power. They are using the data they have to try to sway the American politicians already.

        • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          you’ve failed to answer my second question, which I believe was the important one: why should this behavior be perfectly legal for everyone other than tiktok?

          • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            Yeah it’s a good question, and I think the answer should be: it shouldn’t. Instead of cracking down on one platform or another, they should be cracking down on the bad behaviors built into those platforms.

            But alas, that would require us to elect politicians that understand an ounce of nuance

            • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              I agree with you, but I’m assuming malice because I don’t think that stupidity adequately explains their behavior. I think that, to them, the problem isn’t propaganda and espionage, it’s Chinese propaganda and Chinese espionage where American propaganda and American espionage should be. That’s why they’re not making what tiktok does illegal, and that’s why they’re trying to force a sale rather than actually banning it.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Not a single thing you said has convinced me. And I am going to get on Tik Tok out of spite when this passes into law.

      • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        8 months ago

        TikTok is very heavily influenced by the CCP and could be used to collect data from Americans (probably they already are). Not wanting your biggest geopolitical rival to harvest data from your citizens is pretty understandable.

    • OftenWrong@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      Except for the part where they couldn’t get support for it twice so they shoved it in here to get their way? But that’s ok because you don’t like the silly dancing app that you know basically nothing about right? Other than “China bad”, of course.

      • p5yk0t1km1r4ge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I don’t give a shit about the China bit, I just think it’s dumb and full of misinformation so I really don’t care if it’s banned. I have no reason to hide my thoughts on this. It’s stupid, I think it’s cringey as fuck, and I’ll be happy to see it go. I know nothing about it because it doesn’t remotely interest me in the slightest. I’m sorry you’re upset people don’t like your stupid little dancing app but lashing out like this changes jack shit. You’re right. We don’t like it. Nobody here was hiding that.

  • Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    8 months ago

    Well the Senate killed the earlier bill. There’s a decent chance they pass the Ukraine/Israel aid bill without this amendment. It would then be stricken in reconciliation. Unfortunately there’s also a decent chance the Senate passes it because this version probably fixes things the Senators had problems with.

    If it does get passed there’s a very good chance there’s a court order to prevent anything until the courts rule on the constitutionality of the law. If Bytedance loses that there’s zero chance they sell though. The US market is not big enough for them to jettison an international company.

    • Auli@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Not big enough. I imagine it’s their biggest market.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        It’s the biggest single country but in a world of 7.9 Billion people, 148 million is a fraction.

        • RagingRobot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          But it’s also not available in China correct? They have a separate version with a different name from what I understand. They could do the same for the other regions they serve and sell the US user base to a new company.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 months ago

            The Chinese app is a completely different app and company than TikTok. ByteDance owns two apps. While we might end up with an American version ByteDance is not going to sell TikTok. And at the closest, that version would be an American corporation running a licensed version of TikTok with TikTok’s American server and software infrastructure. But that’s not very likely, even with a year’s lead time. That’s the kind of deal you get when a company exits a market voluntarily. When you have a fire sale you far more often see a company’s assets sold as parts. The problem is it’s not an equal playing ground anymore and free market principles no longer apply.

            So in this case TikTok would still want the most money possible for their buildings, servers, office equipment, etc. That means that all Meta and friends need to do in order to prevent a whole sale is give TikTok a good deal on one aspect. If Meta takes the servers, and Reddit takes the work computers, and Alphabet takes the source code, and Apple takes the buildings, there’s not very much left over for a new competitor to grab and turn into a running concern that could compete.

            So in this case TikTok itself comes away fine. But the American social media market becomes less competitive and consumers have to deal with shittier apps as there’s less competition.

            There are two very concerning points to this law in the future though. This is a law allowing the executive branch to make a declaration about a company and force a fire sale. If this was done to a domestic company with foreign backing then it would simply be the end of that company. Second, this does not in any way actually keep the CCP from getting our data or influencing us through social media. In 2016 Russia famously ran an information op through Facebook. There have been no reforms to keep that from happening again and in fact we saw that same campaign in 2020, it just wasn’t enough the second time. And American Data Vendors willingly sell our data to the highest bidder, including the CCP. They have been caught doing so multiple times, have received nothing more than a slap on the wrist, and there’s no evidence they’ve stopped.

            So this law puts a dangerous precedent into place without solving any of the things it says it’s going to solve. The short story here is that unless we’re talking about school lunches you need to run away the second a politician says it’s for the children.

            Oh and it’s an open question as to if it’s even Constitutional since it’s basically a standing authority to ban companies by name. Which is literally called out in the Constitution and why you’ve never seen a law to punish someone by name in the US. There’s supposed to be a court procedure and a law they’ve violated. If they wanted to make a law saying a company could be banned for giving data to declared enemies and enforce it in civil court that would be proper. But it would immediately fail because all of our Billionaires are ass deep in the data markets. So we have this smoke cloud instead.

          • azuth@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Why would they sell? That would create a competitor that could easily expand into other markets and take away that user base as well.

    • MisterMoo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      38
      ·
      8 months ago

      Why are you cheerleading for TikTok to remain in the hands of a US adversary, during the same week when said adversary forced a US company to abjectly ban US-based messaging apps?

      Retaliation. Tit for tit.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        8 months ago

        If the government can just point at a company and force a fire sale then there is no market, there is no order, there is no financial industry. This is an incredibly dangerous law.

        • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          8 months ago

          The government absolutely has unconditional and unlimited authority to restrict enemy states from ownership of anything in the US they want to.

          There is absolutely no possibility of any Constitutional issue. The government has explicit authority to handle anything they want about international commerce in the Constitution.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            8 months ago

            That’s why they’re having to pass this law I guess then? Because they already have the authority to do the thing they’re trying to make the law to get the authority to do?

            And TikTok isn’t owned by China. It’s owned by ByteDance, a MultiNational Corp with Chinese ties. It’s not operated out of China, Tiktok is operated out of Singapore and Los Angeles.

            And what exactly is the security concern of people making funny cat videos? Nobody is saying the government has to put Tiktok on government computers. So what exactly is the exposure here that trumps the first amendment and prohibition on bills of attainder in the US?

            • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              To your first point, yes, exactly. Congress mostly has to pass bills to exercise their power. For example: they have the authority to decide finances. They pass bills to (barely) get that done.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                8 months ago

                You’re not wrong but even if this was a standing authority being used in the same way as passing the budget, it would be illegal because it targets a single entity by design. The Constitution prohibits that which is why laws are written as behavior rules you have to violate and then the government proves you violated them in court. Just declaring a company or person persona non grata is something our founders specifically prohibited.

            • bastion@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              You’re thinking of laws in terms of obedience. Law is about agreed-upon structure (sometimes functional, often dysfunctional).

              Enforcement is about obedience, and comes up when people don’t go along with the agreed-upon structure. When the structure is made poorly, enforcement has harmful consequences.

              Examples:

              • food stamps (law)
              • no stealing (law)
              • preventing theft or multiple-subscription to food stamps (enforcement)
              • the wilderness act (law)
              • suing the government for not following the wilderness act (enforcement)

              Law and enforcement are closely linked, but definitely distinct.

              They have the authority to create structure (pass laws) regarding foreign powers operating within the States. So they pass laws (create structure) that state the agreed-upon structure, and enable that structure to be enforced.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                8 months ago

                Except we don’t have that power. Not unless there’s a national security threat. And they might make our children more woke isn’t a national security threat.

                American individuals and this company have a first amendment right. Furthermore this isn’t a ban on all foreign owned companies. This is a ban on companies with ownership that have nebulous ties to certain countries. A list we can add to at any time. That is capricious and open to being abused. It’s also unconstitutional under the no Bills of Attainder rule.

                • bastion@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Except we do have that power. There’s reasonable national security risk, and your lack of understanding of the dynamics involved doesn’t make them nebulous to others.

                  In any case, if you don’t like it, vote with your life choices. If it’s not that important, well… …it’s not that important.

            • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Passing laws is how they regulate international commerce. Or one way. Treaties are another. Executive orders are another. Actions of regulatory bodies within frameworks established by prior legislation is another.

              Congress passing legislation to stop hostile foreign ownership of a US business that’s doing harm is well within their authority.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                8 months ago

                A. Doing what harm? People just throw this around and there’s been no evidence except, “lol it’s a social media company”.

                B. It’s not within their authority unless there’s a specific national security problem. So what about TikTok is going to breach national security? Are they stealing military secrets? (They were already banned from government devices along with other social media apps so the answer is no. They’re not.)

                The Constitution is supposed to protect us from the government just pointing at us and declaring us criminals. Today it’s TikTok tomorrow it’s you.

                • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  A. It’s malware that does an obscene amount of spying, even compared to other social media. Forcing the sale isn’t good enough. It should have been outright banned.

                  B. That’s incorrect. Their authority over foreign trade is unconditional and absolute. There are absolutely zero restrictions on what they can do to restrict foreign trade. Non-US companies have literally zero constitutional rights. They can ban all trade with any foreign person or business who has any commercial interaction with China if they wish. The Constitution places absolutely zero restrictions on their authority to restrict international trade.

                  No, the slippery slope does not exist, ignoring that that’s a stupid fallacy for a reason. I am not an enemy state. I am a US citizen. I have Constitutional rights. TikTok doesn’t, and for very good reason.

        • jumjummy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          8 months ago

          The alternative is to outright ban it. Tik Tok is a cancer directly controlled by a hostile nation state. The government absolutely has the right to block foreign interference like this.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            8 months ago

            Pray tell how is this any worse than Facebook? Is the CCP in the Los Angeles TikTok office moderating content?

            Or is this just more bullshit invented on the spot to justify an unconstitutional power grab?

            • Lynthe@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              8 months ago

              Facebook isn’t under an obligation to provide America’s data directly to the government of a hostile foreign power. Tiktok is

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                8 months ago

                An obligation? Is there proof of that? That’s a pretty incendiary accusation.

                • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  They’re owned by the CCP (and before you say they’re not, the ByteDance C-suite is basically all current Chinese citizens and the headquarters is in Beijing).

                  Businesses and people do not have rights in the way most westerners are used to. Assume anything out of China or generally owned by Chinese companies is a direct arm of the CCP … because even if it isn’t today, the CCP can unilaterally throw down an order from the top and take control of the company/have them do whatever they want or the leaders replaced.

              • OftenWrong@startrek.website
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

                Facebook literally conducted “social experiments” on like a million of their users and didn’t even get a slap on the wrist. What you’re saying isn’t even true but if it was so what? Another country profits off of stealing my data instead of the US? What has the US ever given me for my data? My taxes already help.fund genocides and I don’t get any say in any of it so fuck it.

      • tedu@azorius.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        8 months ago

        The first amendment doesn’t have an exception for retaliation.

      • OftenWrong@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Because it has absolutely nothing to do with any of that and everything to do with US corporations wanting our data and eyeballs back. If you think otherwise you’re just too easily manipulated.

  • x0x7@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Weren’t you all just hating on Republicans for not voting for that bill.

    How about an all bills must be fucking separate bill?

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      You need to fix voting in congress first. The reason riders get put in is because some small bills that are of no interest to some in congress would never make it because they’d never get enough votes to pass. Of course the system got abused to hell with poison pills and shitty bills that are crammed into popular legislation to make it hard to pass or make good legislation pass shitty laws.

      So yeah, split the bills. But make these clowns vote on everything.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      This was a separate bill. Til Tok, Taiwan, Ukraine, and Israel were all separate. They were brought to the floor at the same time, but they could’ve all been voted on differently

      • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        20
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        At least the Genocrats cant hide behind the “it was bundled in with Ukraine” excuse now. The end up the exact same as the Republicunts.

        Both sides are exactly the same.

          • irreticent@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Linkerbaan is just a troll. Always trying to muddy the conversation with terms like “genocide joe” and “sleepy joe.” I assume “genocrats” are his clever portmanteau for genocide Democrats.

            Edit: notice how he edits his comments to make them more “both sides” instead of the original “Democrats bad” message.

  • Panda (he/him)@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Oh, no! What will I do without my level 5 gyatt rizz livvy fanum tax dunne rizzing up baby gronk ice spice wat da dawg doin skibidi toilet in real life only in ohio we go jim zyzz creatine alpha sigma cuh dey board?

    This bill would also outlaw using VPNs to view such restricted platforms, and has a general policy that would allow lawmakers to ban any platform they claim is a national security risk. No overreach here!

    • Fades@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      The poor kids will lose everything because of course you can only host that kind of fucking trash on tik tok!! It’s either on tik tok or not at all!!!

      it’s ridiculous how attached these children are to a chinese company lol. They just host the goddamn footage and provide an algo to feed that shit to you. THAT’S IT! TT ain’t some special fuckin unicorn

      but the kids are kids and they don’t want to think about and understand that. Most on tiktok probably don’t even know of or remember Vine or the other previous iterations of the same exact shit concept. But noooo, the CCP must be allowed to frame the narratives/algos and vacuum up all possible PII data!!!

      now that aside, the VPN part you mention is indeed disturbing. Could you please provide the source / exact wording for this claim? I want to read more about it but can’t find anything close to what you are suggesting

      https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/8038/text?s=3&r=1#toc-H2669E9E74E8A43039D7E92B5E8152F38

      VPN or virtual private network are not mentioned anywhere

  • RageAgainstTheRich@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    Can we just put the american and chinese government in a room and let them fight it out untill they are done?

    Just let me watch my funny cat videos and cooking videos in peace thankyou very much.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    It would mark the first time ever the U.S. government has passed a law that could shut down an entire social media platform, setting the stage for what is expected to be a protracted legal battle.

    “It is unfortunate that the House of Representatives is using the cover of important foreign and humanitarian assistance to once again jam through a ban bill that would trample the free speech rights of 170 million Americans,” said TikTok spokesman Alex Haurek.

    National security officials in Washington have feared that the Chinese government could use TikTok to promote propaganda aimed at interfering in U.S. elections, or surveil some of the 170 million Americans who use the app every month.

    While there has been no evidence made public that Chinese government officials have accessed Americans’ information through TikTok, the idea that China has the theoretical ability to weaponize an app used by half of America has been enough to set off an all-out crackdown.

    And during the Trump administration’s campaign against TikTok, China added content-recommendation algorithms to its export-control list, meaning selling the technology would require the blessing of the Chinese government.

    “The Chinese said very firmly this month at senior levels that they won’t let the algorithm be sold and without it, it’s an empty deal,” Lewis told NPR.


    The original article contains 701 words, the summary contains 215 words. Saved 69%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • letsgo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    “they won’t let the algorithm be sold and without it, it’s an empty deal” I don’t see how that’s a problem. Obviously there’s a great deal of knowledge about what “the algorithm” does across the userbase; just get users to raise tickets about what they miss and others to upvote them, then knock them off one by one. There’s nothing magic about “users who liked post A also liked post B” or “company X paid us $1000000000000 so here’s post C whether you like it or not”. It might even end up being better than the original.

  • skymtf@pricefield.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    8 months ago

    It’s not even about propaganda it’s not having it until their thumb, they can’t push a button and ensure the top video under trans on every search is Matt Walsh, and yeah on all other major platforms if you search trans people critical of trans people pop up. The reasoning isn’t popularity or engagement, the US government has ordered them to do it through backroom tax deals and Slapp orders. Next stop for the US gov is gonna be the fediverse and AT proto, they are gonna argue that not just anyone should be trusted and that running a social media server is a big task. security blah blah children, protecting your data. Than lass a bill require you to obtain an FCC license to host your own social media site. It only gets worse from here folks

    • OftenWrong@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Even if someone hates TikTok for whatever reason this should still piss them off. They tried to do this twice and the people said NO both times. To the extent that they spread a bunch of bs rhetoric claiming people were forced to call their representatives last time because they got so much immediate push back lol. Nobody was forced to do anything. A notification was sent to TikTok inboxes telling people about the vote and offering to help them contact their local reps about it. A bunch of people exercised their rights to have a voice and did just that. That was it. That’s what happened.

      Now here we are. In an incredibly undemocratic move, they forced the ban through anyway.

    • Mango@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      I didn’t really like your attitude about it, but you’re probably right. Moving goalposts is what the US does to establish precedents.

    • BreakDecks@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Look, I hate TERFs and distrust the US government, but this take is just conspiracy theory nonsense. Unless you have some evidence that the US government is forcing social media to promote anti-trans content, I have absolutely zero reason to believe your claim over the more believable explanation: that promoting controversial content drives engagement and increases ad revenue.

  • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    I will never vote for my rep again because of this. Climate change, runaway COL, rising wealth inequality, legalize cannabis, Middle East on fire, flood in the district that killed people…utter silence.

    Banning Tik Tok was the priority.

    I won’t vote GOP but my rep is never getting my vote again.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Could have voted nay, could have refused to vote on it, could have demanded a rider be attached passing universal healthcare. Choose to vote against our rights to use as shitty app. Therefore I choose to never vote for them again.

        Unless you got a time machine my decision is final.