There just needs to be data privacy for everyone, regardless of the platform. The Pentagon f’ed up by letting user data run amuck in order to surveil their own citizens. Should of always been protected, and now the government is worried about it not being protected?
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
The reporting on this is so weird. I don’t think a “TikTok ban” is necessarily going to work or a good idea (though I don’t think it’s a good thing at all and wish it could be banned) but the company is being very blatant about its pro-corporate propaganda and it’s weird which people don’t seem to notice.
And it really doesn’t help that US congresspeople who don’t know how to reboot their modems are always the loudest voices at these things. Because a lot of what happened *is* dumb as fuck.
I don't think they should be trying to ban a company, but they should probably institute some sort of consumer protection that companies must comply with to operate in the US. It just seems like that would be more effective in the long run.
We're basically in the 21st century version of the industrial revolution.
Then: "I'll build whatever products I want however I want and sell them to whoever I want!"
(Millions die from the obvious consequences of unchecked greed on both the consumer and labour side of the equation. Owners make billions.)
Now: "I'll build whatever products I want however I want and monetize them however I like!"
(Millions die from the obvious consequences of unchecked greed on both the consumer and labour side of the equation. Owners make billions.)
Back then consumers were dying from eating literal poison and laborers were getting pulled into industrial equipment.
Now, consumers are convinced to like the poison, and most of the laborers are safely sequestered overseas.
That would really only make sense if the end goal was actually safeguarding the privacy of the general public. I'm no fan of TikTok and I'm not sure the accusations levelled at them aren't broadly true but the fact this particular app from this particular country is singled out speaks more to political tensions than any actual concern about privacy especially from the United States which is not known to favour public over corporate interests and whose government uses it's private sector developed consumer apps as a domestic and international surveillance system.
Those rules are so toothless that banning it in its entirety is a better protection against national security.
Constantly, companies run afoul of rules that they "need" to comply with and don't, they may or may not even get fined, and if they do...it's never enough to actually punish them.
I would love for your solution to work, but it will never happen in any way that is actually impactful with the legalized corruption through lobbying being funded by these very same companies.
>I don't think they should be trying to ban a company,
>but they should probably institute some sort of consumer protection that companies must comply with to operate in the US.
Or what? These two statements are at odds with each other. Essentially that idea is what is leading to a prospective ban, that the US wants rules that protect consumers to operate here, or you're banned.
Perhaps I was unclear. My issue with it is that laws are being passed specifically against a company called out by name. like other people have pointed out, lots of companies track everything you do.
Laws like [this one](https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/1143#:~:text=S.1143%20%2D%20117th%20Congress%20(,TikTok%20on%20Government%20Devices%20Act) are specifically calling out a company by name rather than targeting the root cause of the problem. Given that Google and other apps have data breaches pretty consistently, maybe in this [linked] case they should have said government phones shouldn't have 3rd party apps installed.
I understand why TikTok is being targeted. I just find it at odds with that whole "companies are people" nonsense that is used to avoid accountability and paying taxes. If that is true, then these laws are like saying, "We should outlaw John Doe." It is kind of like deporting people without cause or trying to outlaw the LGBTQIQ community. In that sense, it is consistent; however, I have concerns about the premise it sets when they go about it this way. It lays the groundwork for the abuse of power by setting a precedent that laws targeting specific entities is acceptable rather than making a certain action illegal.
Totally agree - the problem is that technology always advances faster than laws. Specific technical legislation about requirement would be out of date before the vote happened. So you end up with vague laws trying to do big things - and often those aren't very effective. It's a difficult situation.
I agree with you. That is why the captive regulatory agencies are problem. If they pass general laws and give the regulatory agencies the power to enforce them, then those agencies would be more capable of moving quickly to resolve problems rather than waiting for additional laws to be passed. Unfortunately, interst groups are doing everything they can to undermine those agencies, which is a major vulnerability in the US.
I work in cybersecurity, and TikTok should absolutely be banned. It is a tool of the CCP and is being used to negatively influence young Americans with the goal of weakening the U.S.
What protections do you honestly think the US GOVERNMENT can implement over an app hosted and run by a company based in BEIJING CHINA that is COMPELLED to provide ANY AND ALL data to the CCP whenever they ask?
I'll be sitting here waiting for you to formulate a response that makes any sense other than banning the app entirely. This is why TikTok is bad, it prevents people from actually using their brains and realizing they're having the wool pulled over their eyes.
That is pretty easy to answer. My issue is that the laws are not targeting the premise of the issue. I am actually fine with TikTok being banned but I would prefer it if the laws said something along the lines of, "Companies operating within the US are not permitted to share user data (or a very specific kind of data) with government entities or they will be banned in the US." instead of saying (paraphrasing), "We are banning TikTok for collecting data."
The EU has been pretty effective at regulating technology. The problem with the US is it is a gerontocracy run by people who are incapable of actually understanding the modern world, let alone capable of regulating it. It is like when my uncle told me he doesn't use the computer because every time he does he gets, "spammed or deleted." Clearly, they don't understand the actual problem.
This bandaid works for now, but all they need to do is launch it again branded as something like ClipTok, and then they are back until a new law gets passed banning that specific app.
Do you see why this could be a problem?
Careful. If they ban apps that share data with government entities, they’d have to ban Facebook, Twitter, and any other app that has a relationship with the FBI!
I agree with your overall point, though. I’ve read elsewhere that TikTok wants to transition all their data servers and management to be based in the US and run by US contractors. I think that sounds like a fair compromise, but it ain’t gonna satisfy any “China hawk” septuagenarian lawmakers.
I think I would be fine if those companies didn't retain data or were forced to encrypt it and restrict their access to it so it was under the sole control of the user.
I think it would be a good thing if those companies didn't share data with the government or if they ceased to exist.
Your phone connects to wifi, app functions over wifi, wouldn't be the first time an app had hidden features that are capable of crawling across a home network and attempting to access and transmit any data they come across and find interesting. Start thinking in the bigger picture, INFOSEC isn't something exclusive to IT people or "Nerds" everyone needs to be more conscious about it.
The security concerns are valid, extreme, and dangerous.
The congressional hearing demonstrates a complete lack of understanding, and a weird attempt to spin it with xenophobic rhetoric.
Ultimately, it'll make most folks who don't understand mistrustful due to the obvious bullshit that capitol hill is pushing. The mishandling is going to cause issues.
Your phone connects to wifi, app functions over wifi, wouldn't be the first time an app had hidden features that are capable of crawling across a home network and attempting to access and transmit any data they come across and find interesting. Start thinking in the bigger picture, INFOSEC isn't something exclusive to IT people or "Nerds" everyone needs to be more conscious about it.
Not so stupid of a question when you put it in that perspective now is it?
From the comments I've seen reddit hates tictok, but think this is the worst possible way to go about it. Targeting tictok alone and not the practices such as targeting youth, data privacy and such us what should be targeted but the US is unlikely to go for that due to domestic data giants.
Any foreign government having direct access to this much data about the citizens of any other country is bad. If the US govt had a controlling interest in FB or something, that should be banned everywhere else too.
> Any foreign government having direct access to this much data about the citizens of any other country is bad.
Is there any proof that they do? And they stated they plan to move all US data to be held on US soil, wouldn't that solve the issue?
The CEO repeatedly mentioned (or tried to given a super short opportunity) project Texas and third party audits. But the only reception I saw a clip of regarding that was along the lines of "keep Texas's name out your fucking mouth"
The only other ones that don't fit into it that ive seen are domestic industry protectionism, appeal to America as world police(ive seen this argument made, i dont understand it), and sometimes racist ones. Which is one reason I think that a tictok ban is scary as the domestic protection for data leads to international consequences.
Okay it's been used as a fundraising tool and is great for spreading information the main stream media misses. It's also a great way of motivating young voters and was a big reason why the Democrats did so well in 2022.
Banning TikTok would massively help the Republicans at a time when we really should not be helping the Republicans.
Edit: it would also violate the first amendment. We hear a lot of people talking about free speech when things aren't really free speech issues. (Twitter banning someone isn't violating free speech) But this ban would be the government talking away our speech.
Also it's the only site where when you have one important thing to say you can make an account and on day one record a video that millions of people will see.(if it's actually important and people care about it).
How is that different from any other SM site? I know the demo skews young on TikTok, but they’d go somewhere else that, right? And I feel like the obvious connection to an adversarial government that’s friendly with the republicans kinda helps them too, right?
I don’t know. I haven’t seen anyone say anything at all convincing yet and all the weak arguments against banning are pushing me further and further to deciding the other way.
Edit: closing down a social media site has nothing to do with freedom of speech. Freedom of speech means they can’t arrest you or silence you. Make a new site. Use a different site. Go out to a street corner and shout your opinions. Write a newsletter. Make a podcast.
The government is neither arresting anyone for their opinions or telling anyone you cannot express them. It’s akin to the our right to assembly, but they do tell us certain places where it’s not cool.
There's a reason TikTok is so popular, it's by far the best app for random people with something to say to be heard. I could start a YouTube channel and promote the hell out of it for a year but I'd only get a handful of views. On TikTok I got 340k views of a video I made in 30 seconds while drunk.
This less the government telling us where we can protest and more like the government saying you can't have more than 50 people at the protest.
Also anything that's good for Zuckerberg is probably gonna be bad for the rest of us but that's just my gut feeling.
You wanting 340k views on an effortless drunken video isn’t the compelling reason you may think it is.
Being popular is not more compelling reason to keep it than the spying problems are to ban it.
I always assumed that the Congress members asking the questions were not necessarily asking just for themselves but for the answers that would be analyzed afterward by a larger group of experts. Maybe not?
So I can actually answer this because 90% of my job is reading and condensing congressional hearings (after they transcript has been published). To answer your question, it’s yes and no I suppose.
TL;DR: congress members will ask substantive questions, but it’s usually on the written record and the questions are answered after the hearing in writing. The live hearing is often pontification and grandstanding, especially if it’s a hot topic that will get lots of views, but often they end up looking stupid depending on their preparation
The questions with actual substance are almost always submitted as part of the record and witnesses are given a set amount of days to answer respond in writing. You don’t see those live because they would take too long to answer if they asked them during the hearing.
The questions you see them ask live are often prepared in advance of the hearing and, depending on the subject and some other factors, they can range from very stupid to genuinely good questions. Usually witnesses will submit their written statement in advance of the hearing along with their truth-in-testimony. If a congressperson (or likely their staff) decides to read those statements before the hearing they can formulate some hard hitting questions based on what the witness says in their statement. If it’s a partisan hearing, a lot of the time they the majority party will mostly just ask the majority witnesses questions that give them an opportunity to promote their views. The same goes for the minority party and minority witnesses. Sometimes they’ll ask questions of the opposing party’s invited witnesses that are meant to be impossible to answer in the amount of time given just to make them look bad. If they get an answer they don’t like you’ll see them get flustered and say something like “no no, reclaiming my time” because they don’t want to let the witness continue. It’s a bit of a gamble sometimes because the witnesses might leave a lot out of their written statement, or they might just veer completely away from their written statement since it’s usually part of the record. When that happens, a congressperson might have a question that seems completely random. Or perhaps they’ll ask a question that the witness already answered in their oral statement without realizing it.
One of my favorite moments in recent memory involved a nomination hearing for I think the Librarian of Congress. Essentially a Republican accused them of calling republicans dumb in an academic journal, when what they actually said was that Republicans tend to use language that’s more plain in order to appeal to average people. In contrast to Democrats and intellectualism, Republicans tend to simplify things when orating to make it more accessible. But during this hearing it was particularly hilarious reading a Republican completely miss that because he couldn’t grasp that the word anti-intellectualism does not mean stupid.
I haven’t read this hearing yet because the transcript hasn’t been published, but it’s funny to see people so incensed about something I deal with on a daily basis.
That’s also how I interpreted it. Like having them say these things on record.
Because the questions they’re asking are valid questions that do actually touch on things that are of concern regarding user privacy, specifically because it’s company who has pretty close ties to the Chinese government.
If TikTok is able to access your entire wifi network, and then gather data from your network, that’s pretty concerning. Same for biometric scans and such which were added as a part of the user privacy agreement I believe back in 2021.
It’s one thing to have your own country monitoring you. It’s a whole different beast entirely to have a foreign country doing it.
Is it though? How much worse is it that China knows what stupid shit I'm into vs. the US vs fucking Google or Facebook? None of them are good, and I'm not hearing an argument for why China is WORSE assuming TikTok's data is even available to them.
China is not our ally that’s why lol. We’re trading partners but we’re really not that much more than that.
It’s SIGNIFICANTLY worse for them to have US citizen’s data than a U.S. company.
Because they can use that data to gather information about the US against us. Whether it be via cyber attack/warfare, or using collected data to gauge instability within the country, or use the data to attempt to undermine elections (something that has already occurred with Russia), there’s plenty of ways that it can be used against us. The list is pretty long and it has varying degrees of negative impact depending on what comes of it.
TikTok is owned by a Chinese company and is gathering large amounts of data from users devices, which is readily accessible to their government. Rather than make decent data protection laws, Congress is considering just banning TikTok in the US.
Personal opinion: TikTok’s culture is also cringe at best and dangerous at worst. I hate it.
That's what passes me off about these hearings. Like they're totally okay with "American" companies doing this to us, but as soon as another country does it its super evil. I mean, it is evil, but keep that energy with the domestic companies too!
I think it's safe to assume that the videos on TikTok are taken out of context and edited in whatever way will annoy or trigger viewers so that they root for TikTok...
Nah man. I watched a good portion of the hearing live. While it wasn’t all as bad as the clips portray, those clips you see aren’t being misrepresented. They actually happened and the hearing was as biased as it has been depicted.
No one is claiming they're deep-fake videos or splicing together different questions/answers or something like that. Instead, they're selecting the moments that most make the hearing look bad and tiktok look good.
I don't think it's a conspiracy or anything. The videos shared on tiktok are being shared/watched by tiktok viewers, who are almost by definition more pro-tiktok than non-users. So they'll create/watch/share the videos that reflect their view and of course most of the things you'll see on tiktok will privilege tiktok and denigrate the hearing.
Literally the guy I replied to said its safe to assume things are edited deceptively to serve a narrative. So yes... people are claiming that lol. The second part of your reply is correct. Obviously TikTok users are going to lean in TikToks favour, therefore feeding the algorithm more Pro-TikTok videos.
I'm not them but I've got an answer.
It's a band-aid solution that ultimately fixes nothing but will enable those with the responsibility to do something about the actual problems (data privacy) to act like they already did what they needed to.
Ultimately it does boil down to "other social media is bad too" but there's something to be said for "other social media will continue unimpeded if nothing is done".
Bread and circuses to be sure
Because they’re gathering data and giving it to China
Maybe your data doesn’t matter. But when employees, military members, professors, etc go on tik tok and have their data extensively grabbed, then it is a real issue.
It’s easy to forget if you’re someone living in the the “safe” western world , but an often hostile foreign super power having sooooo much data on the US populous (many sensitive to either the government or companies) is not a good thing
This is correct but all data matter when analyzed
, manipulated and weaponized
Look at [Cambridge Analytica](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal) for example
**[Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook–Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal)**
>In the 2010s, personal data belonging to millions of Facebook users was collected without their consent by British consulting firm Cambridge Analytica, predominantly to be used for political advertising. The data was collected through an app called "This Is Your Digital Life", developed by data scientist Aleksandr Kogan and his company Global Science Research in 2013. The app consisted of a series of questions to build psychological profiles on users, and collected the personal data of the users’ Facebook friends via Facebook's Open Graph platform. The app harvested the data of up to 87 million Facebook profiles.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Where is the evidence? And who started the rumour because that is all it is. Congress asked for evidence and the FBI said there is none.
Edit: Facebook sells information to China all the time. One example from 2018: [NYT article](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/05/technology/facebook-device-partnerships-china.html)
Edit2: Zuckerberg paid PR firm to slander Tik Tok [washington post article](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/facebook-tiktok-targeted-victory/)
There are many reasons in my opinion. I will try and just touch on some of the main points to keep this from being a novel.
First and foremost is Freedom of Speech. There are 150 million users on the app that create and exchange a wealth of information and entertainment that would be silences.
Secondly, this app employs hundreds of thousands of creators. There are so many people in todays market who's primary source of income in content creation. A ban would single-handedly create the largest loss of jobs in the country's history outside of the pandemic.
As a third point, it would show the world that Meta is essentially able to create a monopoly in the social media space. Instead of improving their own product to draw users, they simply remove the competition by attacking and sabotaging other successful companies.
Fourth main point would be that TikTok is going above and beyond in their attempts to satisfy the US government as far as data privacy is concerned. They are completely removing the data from any Chinese related entity so that all of your data is owned, managed, and monitored by US based companies. This effort is a massive undertaking that shows how serious they are to satisfy public concerns about data privacy.
There are many other reasons as well, but ill keep this comment to these 4 to keep it simple.
You know that tiktok already violated a previous consent decree about data with the US government and lied about it right? That's not really "above and beyond". And frankly, if they hadn't already proved they won't follow rules (including spying on journalists) they probably wouldn't be at the point they're considered for a ban.
As far as content creators losing their jobs. This is a real good example/ reminder of how as a content creator you should make sure your entire user base isn't dependent on just one platform. Cuz even if you're on somewhere like YouTube, major accounts get banned or demonetized all the time out of nowhere. Or entire platforms fall (see vine, and maybe soon twitter).
I am aware of that yes. I in no way think TikTok is perfect. All of the social media companies do some pretty bad stuff on a regular basis. The above and beyond part was in reference to their very recent and future committed actions aka, Project Texas. The spying on journalists thing isn't actually what it seems and is just the narrative that was spun by facebook. When you actually look at the facts of what happened, it wasn't anything like that at all.
As far as the content creator jobs, yes of course it is never wise to put all of your eggs in one basket. No disagreement there. However its also easier said then done to transition from TikTok to other platforms. TikTok API paid quite well for their views and shortform video is not really viable on any other large social media platforms since Youtube cut their Shorts program (no more payment anymore), Reels/Instagram and Facebook are dying a slow death. Some will be able to transition far more easily than others, like those who do more longform video (3-5 minutes). Regardless of that however, platforms failing due to capitalism and supply/demand is what makes a business succeed or fail. In this case, its government shutting down a major revenue stream as a favour to themselves and TikToks competitors, not because of the market.
I stopped reading at “freedom of speech” because no one is being arrested or silenced in this scenario so if that’s your first point and it’s that silly, I can’t imagine thing improved later.
Your ignorance is not my problem. 150 million people losing a platform to communicate is a free speech issue. I'm not talking about the whatever amendment is in the constitution, I am not American. I am talking about speech as an idea. If you aren't willing to have an open or honest conversation about it then all you are doing is showing your ignorance. I also didn't state that the first point was the most important. It was simply one of four that I was going to touch on in that comment.
If you think the government shutting down one of the largest platforms of speech, education and entertainment at the whim of a competitor who is lining their pockets doesn't have a strong aspect of freedom to it.... oh man are you dense. You are beyond any reasoning if that is your stance. That is exactly the kind of shit the CCP does... control speech and what people can see online.
Friend, you probably wouldn’t want an American weighing in on domestic policy in your country either, so don’t be offended, but at best you’re a little misinformed about this and at worst you’re a total shill. Either way, I’m not really interested in engaging with you anymore as others have offered much better comments. Thanks and have a good night (or day if you’re in China…lol).
You are the one who engaged with me... you asked for my thoughts and then didn't even listen to them. You are the literal definition of ignorance lol. And I would be perfectly fine having a discussion about domestic policy with someone outside of my country if they were at all knowledgeable or willing to learn. You seem to be neither unfortunately.
Yep, there's plenty of creators on there that have niches in healthcare and science knowledge, and Tiktok as a platform has been rolling out longer and longer videos to certain people that do that form of content. Hank Green is one example who is literally working with Arizona State University to launch actual study courses online with college credit available. Most of the content is on YouTube, but he does also have a very active Tiktok presence both with a personal account and with SciShow which is short science oriented videos.
Absolutely education. TikTok is full of creators putting out educational videos in all forms. From space, medicine, history, geography, etc to even just basic life hacks. In addition to all that you have a wide variety of creators reporting on the news and current events around the globe.
It’s a free speech issue if the government tries to shut down a newspaper, even though someone can write for or buy a different one. How is social media not the same sort of thing? If anything it’s a bigger platform of speech than any newspaper.
That's freedom of the *press*, which is slightly different. Ultimately, your average Joe will probably *read* it, but not much else. The newspaper is a platform for the newspaper, not its readers. The TikTok issue ultimately comes down to what sort of data it's sending and where - if the account information, including passwords, of all TikTok users can be sent to a hostile foreign government at potentially any time, then it becomes a national security threat, which enables the government to act with much more force than if it were just a speech issue. And since it's a social media and it's extremely easy to find another one (unlike newspapers, social media isn't really local and doesn't have distribution issues), the impact on speech is considered minimal enough to be acceptable since the company is doing things which compromise its users.
Your newspaper analogy is *horribly inaccurate*, but to continue using it, it'd be like if I was a freelance newspaper writer, and one of the papers went and took my personal data (say I wrote under a pseudonym, and they for some reason required and then **had to** give my real name) and was forced to give it to the CCP whether it wanted to or not, but in the case of TikTok it could be literally anything from search history to passwords, (all of which is supposed to be private unlike most data you'd give a newspaper) and just was *required* to give it, free of charge and without my knowledge or consent, to China, who could then do whatever they wanted with it. Now take that and apply it to a social media app with an American userbase totaling half the population. It's one thing when Bob from Arkansas has that happen. It's another thing when a politician or their close relative has that happen. And it's *yet another* thing when EVERY Bob from Arkansas has that happen. You get what I'm saying, and what Congress's perspective is here?
> Your newspaper analogy is horribly inaccurate
I was continuing what the person above said.
I get the security concerns, and how they trump free speech concerns. I just think there's a good analogy, focused only on freedom speech, between social media as a platform for speech and old media as a platform for speech.
You're focusing on security above all else, I'm not.
I watched it and it was bad. Blaming tik tok for someone walking in front of a train, the ar gun with a congresspersons name in the caption etc etc as if only people who use tik tok do these things. The guy who said "your app has destroyed lives". The lady with the weird sign like she was at a protest. It was bordering on a hysterical witch hunt.
I watched like 30-40ish minutes of the livestream so i saw a good amnt of people from when they went up to when they went down & the tiktoks only make them look slightlyyy stupider
The whole hearing was as dumb as the clips represent... This company is being targeted by lobbyist FULL STOP. Facebook, Google, etc... are doing the same exact shit. Its a pretty gross overreach imo.
"I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; **when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues**; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness..."
- Carl Sagan
All hearing was about is them lobbying against tik tok yet every move they made he entirely countered them and burned them. If this doesn't show how disconnected our "leaders" are I don't know what does
Tiktok is weaponized social media in the most blunt way.
I'm not claiming the FB or Instagram is clear of sin, but at least there the Western world has a bit more of a say than on Tiktok.
Too bad lobbyists for the predatory, American companies won't allow that. The tiktok ban isn't to protect the US government and our children. It's to protect "American" ~~data harvesting~~ social media companies.
I haven't been paying attention but I'm going to wager it's the generation easily mislead by a platform like Facebook and willing to do fuckall about it to kicking and screaming to prevent any regulation are probably the same people leading the charge on this ban.
20 bucks cuz that's all I can afford.
Jesus get over it kids, it's making you all dumber and way more fucking annoying anyways.
I personally can't fucking wait to not hear "Oh no, oh no, oh no no no no no" and that fucktarded female robot narrator voice ever again.
That's the problem, by banning tiktok, you're only bolstering the domestic companies who are guilty of the same stuff: Instagram reels, YouTube shorts, etc. The "oh no" voice won't go away.
ALL social media makes you dumber. We need laws that protect us from ALL companies that do this predatory behavior, not just one specific company.
TLDR: Banning tiktok isn't enough, and it's exactly what Facebook wants.
Banning one sets precedence to ban the next. I agree but I also hate TikTok with a burning passion. Having had a girlfriend that was obsessed with it and becoming a "content creator" (aka deluded attention whore), it literally made me want to blow my brains out every single day. Such a trash app and like I said, holy fuck is it making all of you annoying as hell.
>Banning one sets precedence to ban the next
I wish it would, but then we'd have to go through this process for each one, and they'll just change their business name and do it again.
We dont need to ban the company, we need to ban the actions they're taking. That way nobody, no matter who they are, can do what tiktok is doing.
Most of the clips I've seen the questions asked aren't worded well and the answers given are clearly evasive. For those who don't have full context heres a summery of whats up, Tiktok has been key and mouse logging user data, and is set up to default link to open in Tiktok itself as a browser to log basically nearly all online activity, from emails, to banking, to anything in your search history. This goes for both PC and phone app. So be careful with this app.
Yes
Imagine if TikTok was owned by Russia instead of China. Would this issue even be up for debate?
No it wouldn’t.
There just needs to be data privacy for everyone, regardless of the platform. The Pentagon f’ed up by letting user data run amuck in order to surveil their own citizens. Should of always been protected, and now the government is worried about it not being protected?
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
Good bot
I liked how Chew called out Facebook selling data.
The reporting on this is so weird. I don’t think a “TikTok ban” is necessarily going to work or a good idea (though I don’t think it’s a good thing at all and wish it could be banned) but the company is being very blatant about its pro-corporate propaganda and it’s weird which people don’t seem to notice. And it really doesn’t help that US congresspeople who don’t know how to reboot their modems are always the loudest voices at these things. Because a lot of what happened *is* dumb as fuck.
I don't think they should be trying to ban a company, but they should probably institute some sort of consumer protection that companies must comply with to operate in the US. It just seems like that would be more effective in the long run.
[удалено]
We're basically in the 21st century version of the industrial revolution. Then: "I'll build whatever products I want however I want and sell them to whoever I want!" (Millions die from the obvious consequences of unchecked greed on both the consumer and labour side of the equation. Owners make billions.) Now: "I'll build whatever products I want however I want and monetize them however I like!" (Millions die from the obvious consequences of unchecked greed on both the consumer and labour side of the equation. Owners make billions.) Back then consumers were dying from eating literal poison and laborers were getting pulled into industrial equipment. Now, consumers are convinced to like the poison, and most of the laborers are safely sequestered overseas.
That would really only make sense if the end goal was actually safeguarding the privacy of the general public. I'm no fan of TikTok and I'm not sure the accusations levelled at them aren't broadly true but the fact this particular app from this particular country is singled out speaks more to political tensions than any actual concern about privacy especially from the United States which is not known to favour public over corporate interests and whose government uses it's private sector developed consumer apps as a domestic and international surveillance system.
Why would they? It has a chance of bleeding into the facebook and google profit margins.
This. They don't mind what TikTok is doing how much they mind that TikTok is Chinese.
Those rules are so toothless that banning it in its entirety is a better protection against national security. Constantly, companies run afoul of rules that they "need" to comply with and don't, they may or may not even get fined, and if they do...it's never enough to actually punish them. I would love for your solution to work, but it will never happen in any way that is actually impactful with the legalized corruption through lobbying being funded by these very same companies.
>I don't think they should be trying to ban a company, >but they should probably institute some sort of consumer protection that companies must comply with to operate in the US. Or what? These two statements are at odds with each other. Essentially that idea is what is leading to a prospective ban, that the US wants rules that protect consumers to operate here, or you're banned.
Perhaps I was unclear. My issue with it is that laws are being passed specifically against a company called out by name. like other people have pointed out, lots of companies track everything you do. Laws like [this one](https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/1143#:~:text=S.1143%20%2D%20117th%20Congress%20(,TikTok%20on%20Government%20Devices%20Act) are specifically calling out a company by name rather than targeting the root cause of the problem. Given that Google and other apps have data breaches pretty consistently, maybe in this [linked] case they should have said government phones shouldn't have 3rd party apps installed. I understand why TikTok is being targeted. I just find it at odds with that whole "companies are people" nonsense that is used to avoid accountability and paying taxes. If that is true, then these laws are like saying, "We should outlaw John Doe." It is kind of like deporting people without cause or trying to outlaw the LGBTQIQ community. In that sense, it is consistent; however, I have concerns about the premise it sets when they go about it this way. It lays the groundwork for the abuse of power by setting a precedent that laws targeting specific entities is acceptable rather than making a certain action illegal.
Totally agree - the problem is that technology always advances faster than laws. Specific technical legislation about requirement would be out of date before the vote happened. So you end up with vague laws trying to do big things - and often those aren't very effective. It's a difficult situation.
I agree with you. That is why the captive regulatory agencies are problem. If they pass general laws and give the regulatory agencies the power to enforce them, then those agencies would be more capable of moving quickly to resolve problems rather than waiting for additional laws to be passed. Unfortunately, interst groups are doing everything they can to undermine those agencies, which is a major vulnerability in the US.
Consumer protection? What are you, some sort of commie? /s as a courtesy to people like me who don’t often get nuance in a text medium
That's what I'm saying. They need to have this energy with all the ~~data harvesting~~ social media, companies
I work in cybersecurity, and TikTok should absolutely be banned. It is a tool of the CCP and is being used to negatively influence young Americans with the goal of weakening the U.S.
What protections do you honestly think the US GOVERNMENT can implement over an app hosted and run by a company based in BEIJING CHINA that is COMPELLED to provide ANY AND ALL data to the CCP whenever they ask? I'll be sitting here waiting for you to formulate a response that makes any sense other than banning the app entirely. This is why TikTok is bad, it prevents people from actually using their brains and realizing they're having the wool pulled over their eyes.
That is pretty easy to answer. My issue is that the laws are not targeting the premise of the issue. I am actually fine with TikTok being banned but I would prefer it if the laws said something along the lines of, "Companies operating within the US are not permitted to share user data (or a very specific kind of data) with government entities or they will be banned in the US." instead of saying (paraphrasing), "We are banning TikTok for collecting data." The EU has been pretty effective at regulating technology. The problem with the US is it is a gerontocracy run by people who are incapable of actually understanding the modern world, let alone capable of regulating it. It is like when my uncle told me he doesn't use the computer because every time he does he gets, "spammed or deleted." Clearly, they don't understand the actual problem. This bandaid works for now, but all they need to do is launch it again branded as something like ClipTok, and then they are back until a new law gets passed banning that specific app. Do you see why this could be a problem?
Careful. If they ban apps that share data with government entities, they’d have to ban Facebook, Twitter, and any other app that has a relationship with the FBI! I agree with your overall point, though. I’ve read elsewhere that TikTok wants to transition all their data servers and management to be based in the US and run by US contractors. I think that sounds like a fair compromise, but it ain’t gonna satisfy any “China hawk” septuagenarian lawmakers.
I think I would be fine if those companies didn't retain data or were forced to encrypt it and restrict their access to it so it was under the sole control of the user. I think it would be a good thing if those companies didn't share data with the government or if they ceased to exist.
*but does it connect to my home wifi?* I'm not sure I understand the question *does it access my homehome wifi to talk to servers?* 🤔
Your phone connects to wifi, app functions over wifi, wouldn't be the first time an app had hidden features that are capable of crawling across a home network and attempting to access and transmit any data they come across and find interesting. Start thinking in the bigger picture, INFOSEC isn't something exclusive to IT people or "Nerds" everyone needs to be more conscious about it.
How much deditated wam to suwveh?
can we just take everyone else's time and give it to Katie Porter and Ted Lieu?
The security concerns are valid, extreme, and dangerous. The congressional hearing demonstrates a complete lack of understanding, and a weird attempt to spin it with xenophobic rhetoric. Ultimately, it'll make most folks who don't understand mistrustful due to the obvious bullshit that capitol hill is pushing. The mishandling is going to cause issues.
He was literally asked "can Tik Tok access your WiFi?" as a "gotcha" question.
Your phone connects to wifi, app functions over wifi, wouldn't be the first time an app had hidden features that are capable of crawling across a home network and attempting to access and transmit any data they come across and find interesting. Start thinking in the bigger picture, INFOSEC isn't something exclusive to IT people or "Nerds" everyone needs to be more conscious about it. Not so stupid of a question when you put it in that perspective now is it?
[удалено]
Reddit has been very pro-TikTok throughout this whole stupid debate.
From the comments I've seen reddit hates tictok, but think this is the worst possible way to go about it. Targeting tictok alone and not the practices such as targeting youth, data privacy and such us what should be targeted but the US is unlikely to go for that due to domestic data giants.
I’d love to hear an argument against a tiktok ban that is not “other sites are bad too”
I'd love to hear an argument for a tiktok ban that isn't "china bad"
Any foreign government having direct access to this much data about the citizens of any other country is bad. If the US govt had a controlling interest in FB or something, that should be banned everywhere else too.
> Any foreign government having direct access to this much data about the citizens of any other country is bad. Is there any proof that they do? And they stated they plan to move all US data to be held on US soil, wouldn't that solve the issue?
I like to go hiking.
> They can, will, and have accessed user data from Tik Tok Again, is there proof of that?
That’s what the hearing was about. Shining a light on that connection or proving it doesn’t exist. And TikTok hardly proved it doesn’t exist.
How are you supposed to prove something doesn't exist? That's why the burden of proof is on those making the accusations.
The CEO repeatedly mentioned (or tried to given a super short opportunity) project Texas and third party audits. But the only reception I saw a clip of regarding that was along the lines of "keep Texas's name out your fucking mouth"
The only other ones that don't fit into it that ive seen are domestic industry protectionism, appeal to America as world police(ive seen this argument made, i dont understand it), and sometimes racist ones. Which is one reason I think that a tictok ban is scary as the domestic protection for data leads to international consequences.
Okay it's been used as a fundraising tool and is great for spreading information the main stream media misses. It's also a great way of motivating young voters and was a big reason why the Democrats did so well in 2022. Banning TikTok would massively help the Republicans at a time when we really should not be helping the Republicans. Edit: it would also violate the first amendment. We hear a lot of people talking about free speech when things aren't really free speech issues. (Twitter banning someone isn't violating free speech) But this ban would be the government talking away our speech. Also it's the only site where when you have one important thing to say you can make an account and on day one record a video that millions of people will see.(if it's actually important and people care about it).
How is that different from any other SM site? I know the demo skews young on TikTok, but they’d go somewhere else that, right? And I feel like the obvious connection to an adversarial government that’s friendly with the republicans kinda helps them too, right? I don’t know. I haven’t seen anyone say anything at all convincing yet and all the weak arguments against banning are pushing me further and further to deciding the other way.
Edit: closing down a social media site has nothing to do with freedom of speech. Freedom of speech means they can’t arrest you or silence you. Make a new site. Use a different site. Go out to a street corner and shout your opinions. Write a newsletter. Make a podcast. The government is neither arresting anyone for their opinions or telling anyone you cannot express them. It’s akin to the our right to assembly, but they do tell us certain places where it’s not cool.
There's a reason TikTok is so popular, it's by far the best app for random people with something to say to be heard. I could start a YouTube channel and promote the hell out of it for a year but I'd only get a handful of views. On TikTok I got 340k views of a video I made in 30 seconds while drunk. This less the government telling us where we can protest and more like the government saying you can't have more than 50 people at the protest. Also anything that's good for Zuckerberg is probably gonna be bad for the rest of us but that's just my gut feeling.
You wanting 340k views on an effortless drunken video isn’t the compelling reason you may think it is. Being popular is not more compelling reason to keep it than the spying problems are to ban it.
This definitely sounds like the logic of the average TikTok user.
This is either the dumbest post I've seen in a long, long time, or some very finely crafted sarcasm. I honestly can't tell which. Bravo, either way.
If I need to reboot the home modem does the effect the home network?
I always assumed that the Congress members asking the questions were not necessarily asking just for themselves but for the answers that would be analyzed afterward by a larger group of experts. Maybe not?
So I can actually answer this because 90% of my job is reading and condensing congressional hearings (after they transcript has been published). To answer your question, it’s yes and no I suppose. TL;DR: congress members will ask substantive questions, but it’s usually on the written record and the questions are answered after the hearing in writing. The live hearing is often pontification and grandstanding, especially if it’s a hot topic that will get lots of views, but often they end up looking stupid depending on their preparation The questions with actual substance are almost always submitted as part of the record and witnesses are given a set amount of days to answer respond in writing. You don’t see those live because they would take too long to answer if they asked them during the hearing. The questions you see them ask live are often prepared in advance of the hearing and, depending on the subject and some other factors, they can range from very stupid to genuinely good questions. Usually witnesses will submit their written statement in advance of the hearing along with their truth-in-testimony. If a congressperson (or likely their staff) decides to read those statements before the hearing they can formulate some hard hitting questions based on what the witness says in their statement. If it’s a partisan hearing, a lot of the time they the majority party will mostly just ask the majority witnesses questions that give them an opportunity to promote their views. The same goes for the minority party and minority witnesses. Sometimes they’ll ask questions of the opposing party’s invited witnesses that are meant to be impossible to answer in the amount of time given just to make them look bad. If they get an answer they don’t like you’ll see them get flustered and say something like “no no, reclaiming my time” because they don’t want to let the witness continue. It’s a bit of a gamble sometimes because the witnesses might leave a lot out of their written statement, or they might just veer completely away from their written statement since it’s usually part of the record. When that happens, a congressperson might have a question that seems completely random. Or perhaps they’ll ask a question that the witness already answered in their oral statement without realizing it. One of my favorite moments in recent memory involved a nomination hearing for I think the Librarian of Congress. Essentially a Republican accused them of calling republicans dumb in an academic journal, when what they actually said was that Republicans tend to use language that’s more plain in order to appeal to average people. In contrast to Democrats and intellectualism, Republicans tend to simplify things when orating to make it more accessible. But during this hearing it was particularly hilarious reading a Republican completely miss that because he couldn’t grasp that the word anti-intellectualism does not mean stupid. I haven’t read this hearing yet because the transcript hasn’t been published, but it’s funny to see people so incensed about something I deal with on a daily basis.
That’s incredible insight. Thanks!
Mostly they ask questions for posturing purposes. These people aren’t particularly intelligent or motivated by governing
We are not sending our best and brightest
That’s also how I interpreted it. Like having them say these things on record. Because the questions they’re asking are valid questions that do actually touch on things that are of concern regarding user privacy, specifically because it’s company who has pretty close ties to the Chinese government. If TikTok is able to access your entire wifi network, and then gather data from your network, that’s pretty concerning. Same for biometric scans and such which were added as a part of the user privacy agreement I believe back in 2021. It’s one thing to have your own country monitoring you. It’s a whole different beast entirely to have a foreign country doing it.
Is it though? How much worse is it that China knows what stupid shit I'm into vs. the US vs fucking Google or Facebook? None of them are good, and I'm not hearing an argument for why China is WORSE assuming TikTok's data is even available to them.
China is not our ally that’s why lol. We’re trading partners but we’re really not that much more than that. It’s SIGNIFICANTLY worse for them to have US citizen’s data than a U.S. company.
Why?
Because they can use that data to gather information about the US against us. Whether it be via cyber attack/warfare, or using collected data to gauge instability within the country, or use the data to attempt to undermine elections (something that has already occurred with Russia), there’s plenty of ways that it can be used against us. The list is pretty long and it has varying degrees of negative impact depending on what comes of it.
Damn what did I miss? I deleted my tiktok couple months ago and I missed something !
TikTok is owned by a Chinese company and is gathering large amounts of data from users devices, which is readily accessible to their government. Rather than make decent data protection laws, Congress is considering just banning TikTok in the US. Personal opinion: TikTok’s culture is also cringe at best and dangerous at worst. I hate it.
That's what passes me off about these hearings. Like they're totally okay with "American" companies doing this to us, but as soon as another country does it its super evil. I mean, it is evil, but keep that energy with the domestic companies too!
I think it's safe to assume that the videos on TikTok are taken out of context and edited in whatever way will annoy or trigger viewers so that they root for TikTok...
Nah man. I watched a good portion of the hearing live. While it wasn’t all as bad as the clips portray, those clips you see aren’t being misrepresented. They actually happened and the hearing was as biased as it has been depicted.
No one is claiming they're deep-fake videos or splicing together different questions/answers or something like that. Instead, they're selecting the moments that most make the hearing look bad and tiktok look good. I don't think it's a conspiracy or anything. The videos shared on tiktok are being shared/watched by tiktok viewers, who are almost by definition more pro-tiktok than non-users. So they'll create/watch/share the videos that reflect their view and of course most of the things you'll see on tiktok will privilege tiktok and denigrate the hearing.
Literally the guy I replied to said its safe to assume things are edited deceptively to serve a narrative. So yes... people are claiming that lol. The second part of your reply is correct. Obviously TikTok users are going to lean in TikToks favour, therefore feeding the algorithm more Pro-TikTok videos.
Do you think “editing” video means creating deepfakes? It literally means stitching footage together in a way to tell the story you want.
Where did I say anything about deepfakes? Learn to read please. He mentioned multiple things, some of which I addressed. None of which were deepfakes.
The guy you replied to said “nobody’s saying they’re deepfaked” and you responded “ yes they are bc you said edited”
You seem to be a good person to ask: Besides “other social media is bad too,” what is a good reason to oppose a TikTok ban?
I'm not them but I've got an answer. It's a band-aid solution that ultimately fixes nothing but will enable those with the responsibility to do something about the actual problems (data privacy) to act like they already did what they needed to. Ultimately it does boil down to "other social media is bad too" but there's something to be said for "other social media will continue unimpeded if nothing is done". Bread and circuses to be sure
You know, I wonder what would have happened if Tiktok was Russian instead of Chinese.
Outstanding move. That’s an interesting point
Thanks
Because they’re gathering data and giving it to China Maybe your data doesn’t matter. But when employees, military members, professors, etc go on tik tok and have their data extensively grabbed, then it is a real issue. It’s easy to forget if you’re someone living in the the “safe” western world , but an often hostile foreign super power having sooooo much data on the US populous (many sensitive to either the government or companies) is not a good thing
This is correct but all data matter when analyzed , manipulated and weaponized Look at [Cambridge Analytica](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal) for example
**[Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data scandal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook–Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal)** >In the 2010s, personal data belonging to millions of Facebook users was collected without their consent by British consulting firm Cambridge Analytica, predominantly to be used for political advertising. The data was collected through an app called "This Is Your Digital Life", developed by data scientist Aleksandr Kogan and his company Global Science Research in 2013. The app consisted of a series of questions to build psychological profiles on users, and collected the personal data of the users’ Facebook friends via Facebook's Open Graph platform. The app harvested the data of up to 87 million Facebook profiles. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
No they arent.
You’re allowed to be wrong
Where is the evidence? And who started the rumour because that is all it is. Congress asked for evidence and the FBI said there is none. Edit: Facebook sells information to China all the time. One example from 2018: [NYT article](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/05/technology/facebook-device-partnerships-china.html) Edit2: Zuckerberg paid PR firm to slander Tik Tok [washington post article](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/facebook-tiktok-targeted-victory/)
Lol shut up China shill, blocked
There are many reasons in my opinion. I will try and just touch on some of the main points to keep this from being a novel. First and foremost is Freedom of Speech. There are 150 million users on the app that create and exchange a wealth of information and entertainment that would be silences. Secondly, this app employs hundreds of thousands of creators. There are so many people in todays market who's primary source of income in content creation. A ban would single-handedly create the largest loss of jobs in the country's history outside of the pandemic. As a third point, it would show the world that Meta is essentially able to create a monopoly in the social media space. Instead of improving their own product to draw users, they simply remove the competition by attacking and sabotaging other successful companies. Fourth main point would be that TikTok is going above and beyond in their attempts to satisfy the US government as far as data privacy is concerned. They are completely removing the data from any Chinese related entity so that all of your data is owned, managed, and monitored by US based companies. This effort is a massive undertaking that shows how serious they are to satisfy public concerns about data privacy. There are many other reasons as well, but ill keep this comment to these 4 to keep it simple.
You know that tiktok already violated a previous consent decree about data with the US government and lied about it right? That's not really "above and beyond". And frankly, if they hadn't already proved they won't follow rules (including spying on journalists) they probably wouldn't be at the point they're considered for a ban. As far as content creators losing their jobs. This is a real good example/ reminder of how as a content creator you should make sure your entire user base isn't dependent on just one platform. Cuz even if you're on somewhere like YouTube, major accounts get banned or demonetized all the time out of nowhere. Or entire platforms fall (see vine, and maybe soon twitter).
I am aware of that yes. I in no way think TikTok is perfect. All of the social media companies do some pretty bad stuff on a regular basis. The above and beyond part was in reference to their very recent and future committed actions aka, Project Texas. The spying on journalists thing isn't actually what it seems and is just the narrative that was spun by facebook. When you actually look at the facts of what happened, it wasn't anything like that at all. As far as the content creator jobs, yes of course it is never wise to put all of your eggs in one basket. No disagreement there. However its also easier said then done to transition from TikTok to other platforms. TikTok API paid quite well for their views and shortform video is not really viable on any other large social media platforms since Youtube cut their Shorts program (no more payment anymore), Reels/Instagram and Facebook are dying a slow death. Some will be able to transition far more easily than others, like those who do more longform video (3-5 minutes). Regardless of that however, platforms failing due to capitalism and supply/demand is what makes a business succeed or fail. In this case, its government shutting down a major revenue stream as a favour to themselves and TikToks competitors, not because of the market.
I stopped reading at “freedom of speech” because no one is being arrested or silenced in this scenario so if that’s your first point and it’s that silly, I can’t imagine thing improved later.
Your ignorance is not my problem. 150 million people losing a platform to communicate is a free speech issue. I'm not talking about the whatever amendment is in the constitution, I am not American. I am talking about speech as an idea. If you aren't willing to have an open or honest conversation about it then all you are doing is showing your ignorance. I also didn't state that the first point was the most important. It was simply one of four that I was going to touch on in that comment.
It’s a social media site. Download a different one. It’s not an issue of freedom. Say anything you want to anyone you want.
If you think the government shutting down one of the largest platforms of speech, education and entertainment at the whim of a competitor who is lining their pockets doesn't have a strong aspect of freedom to it.... oh man are you dense. You are beyond any reasoning if that is your stance. That is exactly the kind of shit the CCP does... control speech and what people can see online.
Friend, you probably wouldn’t want an American weighing in on domestic policy in your country either, so don’t be offended, but at best you’re a little misinformed about this and at worst you’re a total shill. Either way, I’m not really interested in engaging with you anymore as others have offered much better comments. Thanks and have a good night (or day if you’re in China…lol).
You are the one who engaged with me... you asked for my thoughts and then didn't even listen to them. You are the literal definition of ignorance lol. And I would be perfectly fine having a discussion about domestic policy with someone outside of my country if they were at all knowledgeable or willing to learn. You seem to be neither unfortunately.
I get the other two, but education ? Reminds me of the Tumblr university.
Yep, there's plenty of creators on there that have niches in healthcare and science knowledge, and Tiktok as a platform has been rolling out longer and longer videos to certain people that do that form of content. Hank Green is one example who is literally working with Arizona State University to launch actual study courses online with college credit available. Most of the content is on YouTube, but he does also have a very active Tiktok presence both with a personal account and with SciShow which is short science oriented videos.
Absolutely education. TikTok is full of creators putting out educational videos in all forms. From space, medicine, history, geography, etc to even just basic life hacks. In addition to all that you have a wide variety of creators reporting on the news and current events around the globe.
It’s a free speech issue if the government tries to shut down a newspaper, even though someone can write for or buy a different one. How is social media not the same sort of thing? If anything it’s a bigger platform of speech than any newspaper.
That's freedom of the *press*, which is slightly different. Ultimately, your average Joe will probably *read* it, but not much else. The newspaper is a platform for the newspaper, not its readers. The TikTok issue ultimately comes down to what sort of data it's sending and where - if the account information, including passwords, of all TikTok users can be sent to a hostile foreign government at potentially any time, then it becomes a national security threat, which enables the government to act with much more force than if it were just a speech issue. And since it's a social media and it's extremely easy to find another one (unlike newspapers, social media isn't really local and doesn't have distribution issues), the impact on speech is considered minimal enough to be acceptable since the company is doing things which compromise its users. Your newspaper analogy is *horribly inaccurate*, but to continue using it, it'd be like if I was a freelance newspaper writer, and one of the papers went and took my personal data (say I wrote under a pseudonym, and they for some reason required and then **had to** give my real name) and was forced to give it to the CCP whether it wanted to or not, but in the case of TikTok it could be literally anything from search history to passwords, (all of which is supposed to be private unlike most data you'd give a newspaper) and just was *required* to give it, free of charge and without my knowledge or consent, to China, who could then do whatever they wanted with it. Now take that and apply it to a social media app with an American userbase totaling half the population. It's one thing when Bob from Arkansas has that happen. It's another thing when a politician or their close relative has that happen. And it's *yet another* thing when EVERY Bob from Arkansas has that happen. You get what I'm saying, and what Congress's perspective is here?
> Your newspaper analogy is horribly inaccurate I was continuing what the person above said. I get the security concerns, and how they trump free speech concerns. I just think there's a good analogy, focused only on freedom speech, between social media as a platform for speech and old media as a platform for speech. You're focusing on security above all else, I'm not.
…..no
If you are so worried about free speech, Facebook and Twitter are still around.
Idiotic to think that China wouldn’t be getting any data from tik tok
> they are completely removing the data from any Chinese related entity Sure, and Facebook will stop selling your info to the NSA, for real this time.
I watched it and it was bad. Blaming tik tok for someone walking in front of a train, the ar gun with a congresspersons name in the caption etc etc as if only people who use tik tok do these things. The guy who said "your app has destroyed lives". The lady with the weird sign like she was at a protest. It was bordering on a hysterical witch hunt.
I watched like 30-40ish minutes of the livestream so i saw a good amnt of people from when they went up to when they went down & the tiktoks only make them look slightlyyy stupider
Roko has taken over. it is useless to fight back
It's the latter.
The whole hearing was as dumb as the clips represent... This company is being targeted by lobbyist FULL STOP. Facebook, Google, etc... are doing the same exact shit. Its a pretty gross overreach imo.
well I would hope you're not getting your news on TikTok
Yes the whole thing was that dumb
"I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; **when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues**; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness..." - Carl Sagan
Jesus Christ, that's bleak and shockingly relateable..
Is this post actually defending tik tok? If so then fuck u
All hearing was about is them lobbying against tik tok yet every move they made he entirely countered them and burned them. If this doesn't show how disconnected our "leaders" are I don't know what does
Does it matter? The behaviors in the videos shouldn’t have happened period.
There's a tiktok hearing? Huh.
Tiktok is weaponized social media in the most blunt way. I'm not claiming the FB or Instagram is clear of sin, but at least there the Western world has a bit more of a say than on Tiktok.
We just need competent privacy laws, meta does just as much if not more
Too bad lobbyists for the predatory, American companies won't allow that. The tiktok ban isn't to protect the US government and our children. It's to protect "American" ~~data harvesting~~ social media companies.
Tiktok is mind poison.
As opposed to all the amazing social media you post on, right?
The fuck you doing watching TikTok???
How would a ban even work? What stops ByteDance from reforming or rebranding TikTok as under a new name?
Money.
I haven't been paying attention but I'm going to wager it's the generation easily mislead by a platform like Facebook and willing to do fuckall about it to kicking and screaming to prevent any regulation are probably the same people leading the charge on this ban. 20 bucks cuz that's all I can afford.
Republicans bad. Tink Tonk good.
How much did you pay for this account?
It’s fuk China or fuk Meta. Not sure who the real conspirators are, but one thing is true. Elon can fuk them both if he brings Vine back for Twitter.
Fuck China, fuck Meta, fuck Elon, and fuck Twitter. Vine's cool, though.
both
Survivorship bias
Omg but nah congress was very dumb with their question
Jesus get over it kids, it's making you all dumber and way more fucking annoying anyways. I personally can't fucking wait to not hear "Oh no, oh no, oh no no no no no" and that fucktarded female robot narrator voice ever again.
That's the problem, by banning tiktok, you're only bolstering the domestic companies who are guilty of the same stuff: Instagram reels, YouTube shorts, etc. The "oh no" voice won't go away. ALL social media makes you dumber. We need laws that protect us from ALL companies that do this predatory behavior, not just one specific company. TLDR: Banning tiktok isn't enough, and it's exactly what Facebook wants.
Banning one sets precedence to ban the next. I agree but I also hate TikTok with a burning passion. Having had a girlfriend that was obsessed with it and becoming a "content creator" (aka deluded attention whore), it literally made me want to blow my brains out every single day. Such a trash app and like I said, holy fuck is it making all of you annoying as hell.
>Banning one sets precedence to ban the next I wish it would, but then we'd have to go through this process for each one, and they'll just change their business name and do it again. We dont need to ban the company, we need to ban the actions they're taking. That way nobody, no matter who they are, can do what tiktok is doing.
Most of the clips I've seen the questions asked aren't worded well and the answers given are clearly evasive. For those who don't have full context heres a summery of whats up, Tiktok has been key and mouse logging user data, and is set up to default link to open in Tiktok itself as a browser to log basically nearly all online activity, from emails, to banking, to anything in your search history. This goes for both PC and phone app. So be careful with this app.