• Alien Nathan Edward
    link
    fedilink
    English
    01 year ago

    it would be one thing if they were actually going to ban it, but the plan is pretty plainly for deep state establishment to seize it so that the US government can do all the awful things that they’re accusing the Chinese government of doing. Remember y’all, the difference between information and propaganda is “Do I like the person who is currently speaking?” and nothing more.

    • raccoona_nongrata
      link
      fedilink
      0
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If you can find any Uighurs left ask them if Chinese atrocities are “made up”.

      Do better.

      • Alien Nathan Edward
        link
        fedilink
        English
        0
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I didn’t say anything was made up or that China was doing anything good. You put the phrase “made up” in quotes. Find it in my original comment if you’re quoting me.

        What I did say was that the US government is angling to steal China’s propaganda apparatus to use for itself and pretending that it’s protecting us.

        Read better.

      • Alien Nathan Edward
        link
        fedilink
        English
        01 year ago

        swing and a miss

        the point is that they’re trying to pretend they’re protecting us from propaganda by seizing the propaganda platform and operating it themselves. you don’t trust the CCP and neither do I. Let’s take that as read. do you trust the US government? if this is dangerous, why not shut it down? hell, why not go a step further and make it illegal for anyone to do?

  • Lowlee Kun
    link
    fedilink
    01 year ago

    “What about the people on epsteins list” is gotta be the most generic strawman.

  • @antidote101@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    01 year ago

    Because it’s not a list of rapists, just a list of people Epstein was interested in having influential control over.

    …and even going to the Island just meant he was trying to influence you. He was looking for whatever leverage he could find over people.

  • @solarvector@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    01 year ago

    How is this itself not a fake argument?

    The arguments in support of tick-tock are a bizarre amalgamation of just about every category of bad faith argument. I haven’t seen one that suggests tick-tock it’s actually a net benefit.

      • @The_Lopen@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        Whataboutism means nothing at this point. Risk analysis? Whataboutism. Considering consequences? Whataboutism.

        “Informal” means it’s not actually a fallacy. Prooooobably because people use it way outside of its definition to dismiss arguments they don’t like because they have not thought through whatever they are arguing about.

    • Adkml [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      01 year ago

      The net benefit is that people enjoy it.

      If there was some negative that outweighed that you’d think the bill would be banning that practice but the thing they don’t like is its partially owned by Chinese companies so they’re just trying to force it to be sold so it can cobtinye to operate in the exact same way but just for the benefit of an American billionaire instead.

      • @solarvector@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        Ok, I agree there’s a reasonable argument in there.

        On the one side of the scale is people enjoy it. Maybe that’s enough. I feel similarly about drug policies (that is, people want to use it, consequences are on them, not something that should be forced on them by the state).

        I also think it’s legitimate to say if there’s a problem, policy should reflect that problem. The idea that it’s about protecting American money is probably fair too. But those aren’t really arguments in support of tick-tock. Those are arguments that others should be included if there’s legislation. I would love to see something passed that actually protected privacy universally. A hope for constitutional protection there was one of the casualties of the Roe v Wade overturn.

        Last thing… a nation protecting it’s interests is pretty legit in terms of legislative justification. One country protecting it’s industry is very common and something both countries in question do all the time. Protecting from foreign interference is a pretty standard requisite for sovereignty. If you want to criticize US for not respecting others, I think you’ve got plenty of evidence. That’s still different than saying a county shouldn’t take steps to protect themselves.

      • pancakes
        link
        fedilink
        English
        01 year ago

        Cocaine is something that people enjoy, same with driving drunk or drinking while pregnant. Enjoyment shouldn’t factor into any policy related discussions/ decisions.

        I’m not arguing for or against the app, I do not use it. Enjoyment shouldn’t affect policy.

    • @redempt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      01 year ago

      it’s not that tiktok is good, it’s that banning it sets a bad precedent and will be used to justify further control and censorship of the internet

      • @solarvector@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        That’s a much better argument than what’s presented in this meme. There’s at least an argument to claim that the difference is about curtailing foreign interest through ownership. Ownership does heavily influence a platform. Unfortunately that hasn’t prevented Murdock from owning more formal messaging platforms.

        On a side note, how do you feel about a handful of corporations controlling and censoring the Internet?

      • @zovits@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        I’m all for setting a precedent if it’s about banning chinese spyware and propaganda weapons.

        • @Jako301@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          01 year ago

          They don’t want to ban it, they want to seize controll of it and let it operate as is, just with different propaganda now.

  • @TheControlled@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    01 year ago
    • Are different, unrelated things
    • Involve different parts of government
    • Involve different people in charge
    • Is smoothbrain understanding of criminal investigations
    • Is smoothbrain understanding of due process

    I’m starting to fly down some ‘conspiracy hole’ about this shit: I can’t trust or even hope that the avalanche of memes like these aren’t Chinese (or Russian? they love stirring our shit up for the lulz) in origin. This paranoia reinforces itself in a loop

  • @MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    01 year ago

    The “for the children” arguments are almost always misleading.

    Don’t get me wrong, there’s stuff that’s genuinely “for the children”, but the vast majority of the time they’re doing something for the children it’s not.

    Bluntly, the core of the argument for a lot of the online stuff for the children is reported as protecting them against would be child molestation or dangers of some similar variety. In tiktok’s case, here’s a platform that has huge potential for revenue due to its popularity, and has an established user base. I’m certain that many of the so-called upper class/elites/capitalist pigs/owners of the country, are salivating at the prospect of getting a piece of that. It was said, in the open discussion for the bill to ban tiktok, that they want to “make” tiktok “better”. Not better for the people using it, better for the people who could profit from it. Several of these shit heads have already, formally and publicly stated that they have an interest in acquiring the platform, because the bill says: tiktok will be banned unless it sells to an American owner. So the only way for tiktok to operate in America after the bill is passed, is for them to buy it.

    The legislation isn’t for the children. The legislation is the people who actually hold power, making the government do a thing so they can reap the rewards.

    They want to profit off of the children. Because mind raping them at a young age into a life of consumerism and spending, while earning money for that privilege, is a capitalists wet dream.

  • @WarmSoda@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    01 year ago

    The way .ml cries everyday about TikTok being banned you’d think it was an actual real life crises for all of you.

    Multiple counties have already banned the app (as well as other ccp government apps) years before the US started trying to. Where was all the out cry then?

      • @FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        Yeah that’s true, while it’s being debated in a lot of places the only current bans I can find any news on are for government officials and employees. Now that I think about it, doesn’t that make Biden’s TikTok illegal?

      • @WarmSoda@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        Afghanistan.
        Australia.
        Belgium.
        Canada.
        Denmark.
        European Union.
        France.
        India.
        Lativa.
        Netherlands.
        New Zealand.
        Norway.
        Pakistan.
        Taiwan.
        United Kingdom.

        All have banned the app either from government employees to a nationwide ban.

        • @Jako301@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          01 year ago

          Most governments even semi big companies don’t allow whatsapp or other meta products on their hardware, is that precedent enough to ban meta too? Very few apps comply with the GDPR requirements needed on company/government hardware.

          Look, I despise Tiktok too, but most arguments on here are just “muh China bad” or “look at these other people doing something”

        • @makeasnek@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          01 year ago

          “You can’t use this at work” and “You can’t use this ever” are very different things.

          • @WarmSoda@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            0
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That’s correct. Not every country on that list limits the ban to just govt employees.

            How many apps has China flat out banned? Movies? The actual Internet?

            • @Gabu@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              01 year ago

              How many apps has China flat out banned? Movies? The actual Internet?

              So what you’re saying is that 'murica is just as bad as China

              • @WarmSoda@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                01 year ago

                Hardly. Banning one app for security is nowhere near as bad as blocking most of the entire world because you don’t want your citizens to see it.

                • @Gabu@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  01 year ago

                  Are you even remotely aware of the level of spying going on in 'murica, by 'murica?

        • @Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          0
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          This is a bit dishonest. Only Afghanistan and India have banned TikTok from citizens and neither of them are western countires. In every other country you listed it’s just about government devices.

    • @Jako301@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      01 year ago

      Your phone is 100% CIA spyware either way.

      Besides, I’d much rather have the CCP collect my data than the US, simply cause the CCP doesn’t care about you if you don’t go to China, but the US could hand over stuff to your government.

      • raccoona_nongrata
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        You realize the CCP absolutely does have global social engineering campaigns, right?

        You know how MAGA idiots got fooled by Russian bot farms? That’s you and the CCP. They don’t care about you as an individual the way they do their own dissidents, but they absolutely do want to influence people like you in order to sow chaos, violence and political discord in the US. They see you as a repeater for their propaganda network.

        • @Jako301@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          01 year ago

          How did you suddenly go from spyware to propaganda and are even accusing me of beeing fooled by them? I don’t even have Tiktok on my phone, I just fiddled with the algorithm in a containerised emulator.

          All I said is that I’d rather have China have my data than the US cause China is a much smaller potential threat to anyone outside their country.

          • raccoona_nongrata
            link
            fedilink
            01 year ago

            China isn’t a smaller threat though because, in the same way that Russian bot farms didn’t have to be domestic to manipulate MAGA heads in to trying to topple our democracy, the CCP does not need to be a domestic power to have really destructive influence in the democratic process (which is their goal).

            This idea that the CCP is some benign force just sitting “over there out of everyone’s way” is naive to say the least. The Internet is one of the prime places where they attempt to control narrative.

  • Adkml [he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    01 year ago

    “Can you do something so that any given incel can’t shoot 30 of us while we hide under our desk.” - kids

    “Literally go fuck yourself also no tik tok because it could be dangerous.” - government

  • @tyler@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    01 year ago

    Man people really set up the strawmen here. Congress has literally said it’s about foreign influence, not about protecting children. It has absolutely nothing to do with kids. It has to do with China influencing the citizens of the United States to do things that are beneficial to China, against the interests of the US government.

    It’s not a ban, if China gives up control of the app to a United States entity then there’s no problem. It has absolutely nothing to do with protecting children.

          • Ryan
            link
            fedilink
            English
            01 year ago

            Its worth adding, TikTok in China (it’s called something else, I’m blanking) is entirely controlled on the state and there is absolutely no way that it would be permitted to host any political discussion or advocate mass action not approved by the state. Their “Hey call your congressman” stunt was the most idiotic PR move ever, because they demonstrated that this company is willing and able to leverage the userbase in the US in ways that would never be permitted in “West Taiwan”.

            • I was with you until you childishly suggested that the rightful rulers of China are an imperial dynasty rather than the will of the people. It’s like calling America West England and claiming Charles is the rightful ruler because you disagree with the Vietnam War.

              But yeah china would never allow free expression on their version of tiktok but let’s ban free expression because china does is a bad argument. Let’s make choices based entirely on merit and circumstance.

              • Saik0
                link
                fedilink
                English
                01 year ago

                calling America West England

                But there is part of America that basically is West England. That’s called Canada.

                But yeah china would never allow free expression on their version of tiktok but let’s ban free expression because china does is a bad argument.

                What you post on Tiktok is free speech. How it get manipulated and shared to everyone else by an algorithm controlled by a Country that has everything to gain from the downfall of the USA is not free speech.

          • @RaoulDook@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            01 year ago

            Damn straight they should. No foreign entity should own any American land. Same goes for Canada too, with the obvious problem being their housing crisis caused by foreign real estate investment.

    • @makeasnek@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      0
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Who are they worried China is going to influence? Children, right? If it’s adults, that’s almost more insulting, they think we don’t deserve to be able to see all sides of an argument and are too stupid to discern fact from fiction. We may as well dispense with free expression entirely at that point because the government can just say “you’re too stupid to read this and we’re worried you’ll be influenced, so you can only read the books we’ve pre-approved for you”

      It is every American’s right to think freely, to speak those thoughts to others, and to have others have the opportunity to hear those thoughts whether or not they are “good influences” according to govt. It is wild how easily people are willing to throw that right away for fears of “foreign influence”. What’s next, banning TV shows from foreign countries because they might “corrupt our culture”? Banning books with subversive topics because they will “give people bad ideas”?. This is how the road to fascism begins.

      • @Reucnalts@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        You are asking if banning books is the next thing. Isnt it already happening in the schools in some parts of USA?

      • borari
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        Who are they worried China is going to influence? Children, right? If it’s adults, that’s almost more insulting, they think we don’t deserve to be able to see all sides of an argument and are too stupid to discern fact from fiction.

        Yeah fam, you and me are definitely way too smart to ever be manipulated by military units whose sole job is to effectively manipulate large swaths of the population.

        The answer is everyone. They’re worried about anyone and everyone, because they do it also.

        https://youtu.be/VA4e0NqyYMw?si=u_d-eDOMYA-FetVn

        • @makeasnek@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          01 year ago

          Good point. We should only read content that is approved by the US Govt. Anybody who breaks this rule should go to jail. That is for our safety ✅

          • borari
            link
            fedilink
            01 year ago

            Except that’s not my point, but you already knew that didn’t you? It’s pretty obvious you’re not actually here for a conversation.

          • Saik0
            link
            fedilink
            English
            01 year ago

            We are all vulnerable to manipulation and should only read content that is approved by the US Govt.

            Blocking another country’s possible influence is not the same as ONLY being fed whatever the Government approves.

            TIktok, due to the nature of the company’s ownership and board directors WILL have Chinese Government influence. And they’ve already proven that they’re willing to influence the internet to the point of controlling it 99% for their own citizens. China is the latter of the above statement. The USA and most other countries are barely even doing the former.

          • @Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            01 year ago

            Is there any chance that the fact you’re lemmy.ml user might be an indication that you’re not looking at this completely objectionally? I’m not for the ban either but that doesn’t mean I can’t be honest about the reasons for it.

              • @TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                01 year ago

                You shouldn’t have to personally defend yourself or this post. They want to censor your speech the same way the government wants to censor Tik Tok. So much for liberal personal freedoms.

        • @PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          0
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The problem that many people have with this argument that “China is going to influence us” isn’t that we are immune to influence, its that the argument sounds extremely hallow when our own native social media manipulates the absolute shit out of us already… like what is China going to do that our own country isn’t already doing.

          This is the argument you hear from people on tiktok about why they don’t care about the governments concern.

          Well that and how its kind of disgusting how completely unified the house is in this bill, but couldn’t give a shit about wealth inequality, corporate ownership of residential housing, rampant inflation, rising homelessness, school shootings.

    • @Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      01 year ago

      Congress has literally said it’s about foreign influence

      Which is also a lie. The likes of Twitter, Facebook and Google are just as beholden to foreign governments such as the fascist regimes of India, Israel, Myanmar and others. They pay the people in Congress a lot more in legal bribes, though, so they can basically get away with anything.

      It’s not a ban, if China gives up control of the app to a United States entity then there’s no problem.

      Imagine the uproar if China demanded that Google stopped being a US military contractor…

      What the whole thing is about is empty symbolic rhetoric and xenophobia in an election year and oppressive measures to go with it.

      • @BirdyBoogleBop@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        0
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Google was blocked in China in 2014 for refusing to censor search results. Now search results are censored and must go through their Hong Kong subsiduary. The last part is what the US Government is asking for TikTok to do right?

        China already bans and censors loads of apps and websites already so I don’t think looking at what they do in this instance is a good idea.

          • Okay. Which part of what I written makes you think that? I thought my second paragraph was enough to say China doing things is not a reason to do things.

        • @makeasnek@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          0
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          China did that. We criticized them for it. Now we’re turning around and being just as bad as them. “We should get to do it because _insert_dictator_here does it” isn’t a great argument.

      • borari
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        Imagine the uproar if China demanded that Google stopped being a US military contractor.

        China is actively demanding that all Chinese companies excise American hardware and software from their technology stacks. They know that they can’t divorce a US tech company headquartered in the US from the US intelligence agencies, so it is the next best option. This is colloquially known in China as “Delete A” or “Delete America”. Who is being xenophobic again?

        • @Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          01 year ago

          Ok, China is a bad example, except as what not to do.

          As you pointed out yourself, this bill is Congress acting like the oppressive Chinese government rather than the liberal democracy the US likes to pretend to be.

          • borari
            link
            fedilink
            01 year ago

            Preventing an oppressive government from exerting undue influence on auger sovereign nation’s citizenry is an oppressive act itself?

            • @Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              01 year ago

              Dude. Tiktok is a social media platform that happens to be owned by a company with Chinese government connections.

              It’s not a nefarious conspiracy to control Americans. That would be Facebook and the Republican party platform

              • borari
                link
                fedilink
                01 year ago

                Agreed on the Republican party bit.

                If Facebook could be considered a nefarious conspiracy (or at least subservient to the powers engaging in said conspiracy), why is it unbelievable that TikTok could also be?

                • @Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  01 year ago

                  Because Facebook has been PROVEN to knowingly allow widespread coordinated election tampering (Cambridge Analytica, for example) and steering users towards far right pages and groups,

                  Tiktok is only SUSPECTED based on association with China and furthermore has a much smaller user base and therefore less impact if they DO run election influence campaigns like Facebook does.

        • The difference being that this is about protecting sensitive data like trade secrets, in a complex ecosystem that is impossible to fully oversee. Many western governments have banned Huawei from 5g network components for the same reason and that is solid reasoning.

          But with TikTok it is a very different story. Nobody needs to use it. People are using it voluntarily. In regards to steering people to bad content through its algorithm, it is no different from Facebook or Instagram. The argument @Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world made is valid.

          It is not about preventing foreign or private influence that his harmful to the citizens. It is about controling that influence.

          • borari
            link
            fedilink
            01 year ago

            It is not about preventing foreign or private influence that his harmful to the citizens. It is about controling that influence.

            No, it is about preventing foreign influence on citizens. The fact that some level of control (or more accurately accountability) can be exerted by the US government on companies like Meta is true but unrelated. If ByteDance was a company in the EU we wouldn’t be having this conversation.