"TikTok is stealing your data."
"TikTok is stealing your data."
Meanwhile there's https://loops.video/ and you should share that like I'm doing with your friends that are hooked on tiktok.
Cuz, fuck, this banning our voice thing is getting old.
Pretty sure they're getting the internet hug of death atm.
Lol. Very true. And on a weekend! Lol. With great pow...app comes a bunch of users.
"TikTok is influencing you politically"
So you'll shut down Fox News, right?
Facebook too. Don't forget Cambridge Analytica
I support blocking Facebook and X from the EU for the same reason.
I support blocking commercial, proprietary and centralized social media everywhere.
I don't like to be that guy, however if we play with your idea, there are some issues you will need to consider.
Centralization If we ban centralization then IRC, Signal, Xenforo, vBulletin, you name it will be forbidden as well. There is a reason why we always see some degree of centralization. Federation is tricky to get right from a technical point of view. Even when you have federation, each unit in that "web" will usually have a centralized moderation team and administration.
Proprietary Sometimes, spam/abuse is fought with the help of obscurity. In other words, service providers will hide exactly how they detect spam to prevent spammers from adapting and bypass their technique. Even Signal does this. They have a small proprietary piece of code, specifically designed to fight spam/abuse. The rest of their code is open source as far as I know. Can you suggest a comparable alternative?
Commercial Do you mean that they at most should be non-profit? And if so, why?
Apparently, Meta has just taken part in a huge destabilizing propaganda campaign here in Brazil. The kind that criminal law has punishment for.
It will certainly take a while to gather all evidence and verify it, so I'm saving the popcorn for later. But I just ensured I have enough kernel for a US-sized portion...
Another one: Elon Musk is pushing the whole Grooming Gang propaganda on X to cause tensions in the UK. As if nobody cares about victims when the perpetrator happens to be brown. It's absolute populist BS.
He is also saying that the parliament should be dissolved, and is throwing around more outrageous accusations: https://www.forbes.com/sites/tylerroush/2025/01/04/elon-musk-pushes-for-britains-king-charles-to-dissolve-parliament-as-lawmakers-say-tesla-ceo-is-misinformed/
We have people with obvious political agendas controlling the world's largest social media platforms, and it's not just the CCP.
They absolutely should. In fact I'd be surprised if they didn't do something about it eventually.
"Hey! We can't let them steal that. I wanted to steal that!"
Government: We don't like competition.
This is the most literate take on the issue that I've seen.
Actually, they clearly haven't read anything about Divisions H and I of HR 815 or they would realize that WAS a broad privacy legislation to protect US Citizens.
Least glowing comment
I don't like or use TikTok, but when I see US politicians and TV "Security experts" spiting nonsense arguments to justify banning it shows to me that this is a frivolous case to benefit META and Alphabet rather than a genuine concern in data collection and privacy.
No one gives a shit if your data is collected. I (and presumably you) are not worthwhile targets. The issue is the Chinese government using social media apps based in China to feed anti-US/pro-Chinese propaganda. I'd bet $100 that if (mostly likely when) China invades Taiwan all Chinese owned social media outlets will instantly feature lots of anti-Taiwan content in every country that they may turn for help to try and turn the US population's opinion more favorable to China's side.
This has already happened in douyin, Chinese version of tiktok.
US government couldn’t give two shits if TikTok steals your data. They just don’t want a foreign adversary to.
Also, they don't care about the data. They care about the influence.
Political interference, that's what people need to fear from the platform. I'm sure if it was Russian I wouldn't have to say it.
Hell, just look at the number of pro TikTok memes being shared right now, there's something fishy happening.
just look at the number of pro TikTok memes being shared right now, there's something fishy happening.
If by "fishy" you mean "the ban is going into effect so people are expressing frustration", sure.
I don’t think I see pro-TikTok memes, but rather “why stop at TikTok” memes
As far as I understand TikTok is used as the main example but it will apply to all similar Chinese (or just Bytedance owned?) platforms.
Young people love the platform. Was it fishy when there were Luigi memes? Regardless of how much the state is involved with the app, it's popular.
Oh look, I must be an agent for the CCP cause I'm suggesting there's a legitimate reason for memes.
And their dickhead CEO is invited to the inauguration. Yeah, fishy.
Trump went from wanting it banned to not wanting it banned because it was working in his favor this time, which is... Political interference!
Crazy how hypocritical people are... X should be banned because Musk can interfere in politics with his algorithms, but TikTok doing the same thing on behalf of the Chinese government? No problem!
"Actually, I want to own it"
Honestly at this point I rather have China steal my data vs. The US government. I'd be more likely to see a negative impact from data collection from the US government rather than China. China can't really influence my insurance rates. The US can.
I’m really not able to keep up with the hive on this. One minute- they hate TikTok, A day later, they defend TikTok?
They aren't defending TikTok so much as calling the bluff. The US govt doesn't actually give a rats ass about privacy or data collection. Some relics in Congress were convinced its a national security threat and needs to be banned OR SOLD TO A US BASED BUYER (I'm personally thinking this is the Muskrat's doing, but that's all conspiracy) to preserve national security.
A massive, comprehensive data privacy law would've covered the TikTok base and any software by any other threat. Home run, Grand slam, easy win and easy points.
Of course it's not going that way because it was never about national security.
A massive, comprehensive data privacy law would've covered the TikTok base and any software by any other threat
That's assuming the ban is motivated by privacy reasons, but i don't think it is. It's far more likely that it's because the US has no control over the platform's algorithm, which they fear is feeding Americans media and perspectives that are antithetical to their foreign policy objectives (Blinken and Romney have both stated as much).
A US buyer would be more friendly/responsive to US regulatory influence. That's the only reason this isn't a privacy bill instead of a ban or forced sale.
OR SOLD TO A US BASED BUYER (I'm personally thinking this is the Muskrat's doing, but that's all conspiracy)
If true, Musk may have bought shares in companies that deal with data and wants to simply profit. I have had a work colleague who got rich buying stocks and is bit of a fan of Elon Musk. He admits that private data is basically the new gold but the masses is all too unaware or uncaring for it. So you might be on to something with this.
The hive is (or at least was) a bit split. Many users seem to hate TikTok because they just dislike it for whatever reason (e.g., addictive short form videos), but others view this as a fascist move by the US or anti-China.
I think Trump is going to try to work out a deal where TickTok gets to stay the way it is if the company publicly blames Democrats for all the noise.
They did. Divisions H and I of HR 815 of the 118th Congress make it illegal to collect, broker, lease, trade, or sell US Citizen's personally identifying data to an adversarial nation which is defined in Article 10 as China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea.
You're complaining about the law and you literally have no idea what that law says?
The problem is this doesn't apply across the board. Why is it only illegal if they're selling it to a foreign company? It should be illegal to sell it full stop. This just gives the US government a monopoly on the information which I'm more afraid of than a foreign country having my data since I live here and they can directly affect me.
They made it illegal to sell it to people who explicitly want to harm the USA. Thats a good start.
Ironically, most USA based social media platforms are already banned in China. It just makes sense, if TikTok wants to operate here they need the chinese owners to divest to below 20% or stop sending personal data overseas.
Then why wasn't tik tok blocked immediately instead of being allowed to operate for years.
So technically you're right, but the law they passed left a HUGE loophole. And by loophole I mean just don't be based on those counties and you can gobble up whatever data you like.
It's not even a "loophole" it's literally irrelevant to what people generally think of as "data privacy." Something like GDPR is an example of data privacy.
Cool so what does this law do for me again? I live in America i personally will never interact with those 4 countries. The wording is also dangerous calling Chinaa foreign adversary comparable with the other 3. Which is dangerous. We are in active war with 3 where as China we do massive business.
Passed in April 2024 so useful when Facebook was a broker for Russia in 2016 DIVISION H-- PROTECTING AMERICANS FROM FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLICATIONS ACT
Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act
(Sec. 2) This division prohibits distributing, maintaining, updating, or providing internet hosting services for a foreign adversary controlled application (e.g., TikTok). However, the prohibition does not apply to a covered application that executes a qualified divestiture as determined by the President.
Under the division, a foreign adversary controlled application is an application directly or indirectly operated by (1) ByteDance, Ltd., TikTok, their subsidiaries, successors, related entities they control, or entities controlled by a foreign adversary country; or (2) a social media company that is controlled by a foreign adversary country and determined by the President to present a significant threat to national security. (Here, a social media company excludes any website or application primarily used to post product reviews, business reviews, or travel information and reviews.)
For the purposes of this division, a foreign adversary country includes North Korea, China, Russia, and Iran.
A qualified divestiture is a transaction that the President has determined (through an interagency process)
would result in the relevant foreign adversary controlled application no longer being controlled by a foreign adversary, and precludes the establishment or maintenance of any operational relationship between the U.S. operations of the relevant application and any formerly affiliated entities that are controlled by a foreign adversary (including any cooperation with respect to the operation of a content recommendation algorithm or a data-sharing agreement).The prohibition applies 270 days after the date of the division’s enactment. The division authorizes the President to grant a one-time extension of up to 90 days to a covered application when the President has certified to Congress that (1) a path to executing a qualified divestiture of the covered application has been identified, (2) evidence of significant progress toward executing such qualified divestiture of the covered application has been produced, and (3) relevant legal agreements to enable execution of such qualified divestiture during the period of such extension are in place.
Additionally, the division requires a covered foreign adversary controlled application to provide a user with all available account data (including posts, photos, and videos) at the user's request before the prohibition takes effect. The account data must be provided in a machine-readable format.
The division authorizes the Department of Justice to investigate violations and enforce its provisions. Entities that that violate the division are subject to civil penalties for violations. An entity that violates the prohibition on distributing, maintaining, updating, or providing internet hosting services for a covered application is subject to a maximum penalty of $5,000 multiplied by the number of U.S. users who have accessed, maintained, or updated the application as a result of the violation. An entity that violates the requirement to provide account data to a user upon request is subject to a maximum penalty of $500 multiplied by the number of U.S. users impacted by the violation.
(Sec. 3) The division gives the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia exclusive jurisdiction over any challenge to the division. A challenge to the division must be brought within 165 days after the division’s enactment date. A challenge to any action, finding, or determination under the division must be brought with 90 days of the action, finding, or determination.
DIVISION I--PROTECTING AMERICANS’ DATA FROM FOREIGN ADVERSARIES ACT OF 2024
Protecting Americans' Data from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act of 2024
This division makes it unlawful for a data broker to sell, license, rent, trade, transfer, release, disclose, or otherwise make available specified personally identifiable sensitive data of individuals who reside in the United States to North Korea, China, Russia, or Iran or an entity controlled by such a country (e.g., headquartered in or owned by a person in the country).
Sensitive data includes government-issued identifiers (e.g., Social Security numbers), financial account numbers, biometric information, genetic information, precise geolocation information, and private communications (e.g., texts or emails).
A data broker generally includes an entity that sells or otherwise provides data of individuals that the entity did not collect directly from the individuals. A data broker does not include an entity that transmits an individual's data or communications at the request or direction of the individual or an entity that makes news or information available to the general public.
The division provides for enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission.
If only someone gave a shit about the law
Haha NO!? We're gonna ban it, and whatever platforms you move to, in a game of whackamole until you pick the "right one", like facebook!
Good luck everybodyyyyyy (starts swinging mallet) /S but also that seems to be their mindset
There are laws, TikTok is almost certainly breaking them.
Source?
There needs to be at least some evidence that the American subsidiary of tiktok broke data privacy laws
If they did, they'd be tried under those laws, not some new legislation that allows carte blanche banning without a trial. That should tell you everything you need to know about whether there's any proof of them breaking data privacy laws.
So are Facebook, Google, Apple, Microsoft, and pretty much any big US corporation out there. But protectionism tends to ignore that. They should all (including) either be banned or hit with monumental fines.
None that are comprehensive and strong like all the rest of the G7
YOUR data doesn't matter. Information gained from mass analysis of data that is tied to govt workers and military personnel is a security concern and it is treated as such. Nobody cares about your particular data, on either side (well, maybe ad companies, but if you are a tiktoker, you are already fully compromised there).
On the up side for tiktok kids. The CCP will likely order trump to unblock it.
If our data didn't matter, they wouldn't be harvesting it, never mind making obscene amounts of money with it. If our data didn't matter, there would not be a multibillion dollar industry based entirely upon it.
YOUR data DOES matter, if it didn't, why would they go to such lengths to gather it in the first place?
Yeah ... I said that. Your data can be used and sold, it just doesn't have anything to do with a tiktok ban. They already have your ad data, especially if you are a tiktoker/social media user. The van stems from security concerns, it has nothing to do with the average user, no one cares about them.
What part of "China is a geopolitical adversary so maybe it's fucking different" is so hard for paint chip eaters to understand?
Them being adversarial doesn't really matter. The allies of today are the enemies of tomorrow and the converse, so the who shouldn't matter. The problem is with anyone collecting data on your citizens because it can be sold, traded, stolen, or abused.
If it was about protecting people, a wide-spread countermeasure would be used instead of a pinpointed assault targeting a single app.
We can’t afford bread and they’re trying to ban the circus
This was the obvious progression
The real kick in the nuts is that we get to see that the average Chinese can afford groceries and has disposable income for entertainment, and just in general doesn’t have the insane monetary burdens we have here.
Are you high or sth? The chinese are getting as much extorted as you do, the system of it just differs. Chona got a huge homelessness problem they try to hide from their own people (because officially homelessness was "eradicated" years ago according to propaganda). The worker extortion is brutal and child labour a big problem as well. However, you won't see anything outspokenly crticial about those systemic problems im China on RedNote or sth., their deletion and suppression algorithms are extremely well tuned. Also they got stuff like neighborhood watch and other means of systemic social suppression who'll be alerted of "problematic people" if you post (too much) criticism. Or of course police, in case you really annoy them or happen to be the wrong ethnicity.
Not high. Upvoted nonetheless because what you point out is a very important counterbalance in the conversation. It would be naive to believe there’s not some price paid for what looks like a more secure life.
Yes, china is doing horrible things behind the scenes. Uyghur genocide is beyond reprehensible, aggressive imperialist expansion posturing in the South China Sea, the Taiwan mess, wildly extreme censorship, the great firewall, crackdowns on dissent, intimidation and coercion of Chinese abroad under threat of harming their families in mainland china, corporate espionage, the list goes on.
But here’s the rub.
The cost of just existing here in the states is becoming simply unbelievable, literally. Chinese folks are asking us Americans on this new app if it’s true we need to pay thousands for an ambulance or work 2 jobs to simply afford to live. It’s so outlandish that these Chinese people thought it was their own government telling them made-up ‘America bad’ stories.
As you point out we pay a price for our lifestyle too, and the laundry list is just as long. Despite the evil things our government does, I’m wondering why we ended up with a system where you could become homeless from the financial shock of one ambulance ride, whereas the average Chinese doesn’t have to go live on a sidewalk in the same scenario.
So despite the roughly similar evil governments, why the disparity in daily affordable life?
If you’re at all open to critiquing new information and updating your worldview to accommodate, then you would probably be wondering similar questions as I am now.
You can both be right. The parent post is about perception and propaganda.
The average Chinese citizen doesn't have much access to the internet.
According to this statista article at least 80% of their population has mobile phones with internet access as of 2023. So I'm not sure exactly what you're talking about here.
If the catered ads weren’t so obvious that pretty much most social platforms are stealing your data, not sure what is.
Nothing is free. Especially a ‘free’ account. You are the product at that point.