back to article TikTok could be banned from America, thanks to proposed bipartisan bill

The US government's crackdown on TikTok continues, with the latest salvo being a bipartisan bill that would outright ban the popular social media app from doing business in the country. TikTok is owned by Beijing-based ByteDance, which has led it to become a battleground for privacy advocates who argue that it could be used to …

  1. heyrick Silver badge

    "In China, no company is truly private. Under the country's 2017 National Intelligence Law, all citizens and businesses are required to assist in intelligence work, which includes sharing data,"

    "In the United States, no company is truly private. Under the country's 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (and Executive Orders 12333 (1981), 13355 (2005), and 13470 (2008)), all businesses are required to assist in intelligence work, which includes sharing data,"

    1. nintendoeats Silver badge

      Which is why GDPR is such a problem for American companies...but even if they both do the bad thing, doesn't mean it isn't a bad thing. And while I can absolutely blame the Americans for spying on their own people, I can't blame them for wanting to prevent another country from doing so.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Apples and Oranges

      Under the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, there needs to be a warrant, probable cause, a time limit, and all unrelated records must be destroyed. Under China's law compliance is mandatory and continuous with no cause needed and cooperation must be unrestricted. Resistance is Futile.

      Also, the U.S. law prohibits surveillance based solely on First Amendment activities - in other words, it's illegal for the gummint to implement surveillance because they don't like what you say. China has demonstrated that they will proactively implement surveillance only because they don't like what you say.

      If you fail to comply with the USA law you are charged with a crime and then you go to trial. China has no such protections.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Apples and Oranges

        Now show me a case where illegal access to data by agencies has actually had consequences for the agency involved instead, and please don't tell me that the US does not engage in proactive surveillance via third parties such as Google and Microsoft (there's no real other explanation for the need to have local authentication to involve Microsoft servers otherwise IMHO).

        Laws are pointless if they do not yield consequences for those who break them.

        I'm not defending China here, but the US are not exactly shy either in helping themselves to information if it's in the national interest or if there's money to be made. They just make up more excuses for it.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Apples and Oranges

          Now show me a case where illegal access to data by agencies has actually had consequences for the agency involved

          You have very valid points; however, I was pointing out what the law says. Enforcement is another matter and in the USA I admit is very selective, especially with the well-known politicization of the agencies responsible for these investigations.

          1. chivo243 Silver badge
            Black Helicopters

            Re: Apples and Oranges

            As the wise and witty Frank Zappa observed: "The United States is a nation of laws: badly written and randomly enforced."

            1. Michael Strorm Silver badge

              Re: Apples and Oranges

              Translation; intentionally vague and selectively enforced (the former aiding the latter), as I suspect Zappa possibly intended to imply.

  2. IGotOut Silver badge
    Facepalm

    Where China leads...

    ....the US follows.

  3. thejoelr

    Not going to happen with this proposal.

    Everyone hates Rubio and he does lots of things just for publicity. This has zero chance.

    1. martinusher Silver badge

      Re: Not going to happen with this proposal.

      McCarthy wasn't exactly leading the popularity contests in the 50s but he found that one button to press...

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Not going to happen with this proposal.

      RubioBot is not handcuffed by Asimov's laws of robotics. His prime directive it to play the role of a useful idiot for the Billionaire class.

  4. mark l 2 Silver badge

    I wonder how much money Zuckerberg has thrown in to lobby to get Tiktok banned in the US? A large proportion of the young people are moving from Facebook and Instagram to Tiktok, so Meta would be the ones to gain the most if Tiktok does get banned in the US bring users back to their apps.

  5. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge
    Alert

    Mark Zuckerberg's excitement

    Either I need to get my eyes tested or have some counselling - I read that as "excrement".

    Not just once, but twice. That I suppose is not surprising, give that it is No. 2s...

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Easy self test

    If you use social media = you have already lost.

    End.

    1. that one in the corner Silver badge

      Re: Easy self test

      Hmm, how far does the description of "Social Media" stretch? Any place where random strangers post messages on various subjects, occasionally in a back and forth conversation?

      1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: Easy self test

        I would suggest that the fuzzy line demarking "social media" lies more or less with the sites which are primarily people chatting/pontificatin/ranting on random subjects on one side and on the other, "not-social media" being the likes of comment section such this, which I suspect you are alluding to, where the conversation is generated and guided by the posted articles.

  7. genghis_uk

    US Privacy?

    If Tic Toc is banned in the US, China could still get a majority of the information directly from data brokers for a small fee.

    Congress has had many opportunities to pass some sort of privacy legislation but has backed away after some lobbying cash has been splashed around.

    This is just another performance by a Congress-clown and the fact that the main beneficiary would be Facebook is indicative of how bad it really is.

    1. that one in the corner Silver badge

      Re: US Privacy?

      The big change being, of course, that then money would flow from TikTok to the data brokers - and the small fees can mount up as multiple requests are made.

      Anyone got a map showing which States the data brokers are in?

  8. MrAptronym

    Missing the Forest for the Trees

    I am an old curmudgeon, I don't understand TikTok. That said, the idea that TikTok poses some massive threat seems silly when the US is very happy to allow any other social media platform (And most tech companies) to essentially act as private surveillance companies selling personal data for profit. Practically the entire internet economy is built on the buying, selling and use of this information. Singling out TikTok is just sinophobia, I seriously doubt that the information they can get from TikTok is materially more important than all the information on the open market right now. The US needs comprehensive privacy protections, but I imagine that would be bad for profits and won't be happening.

    The idea that China could use the platform to influence people may have more reality to it, but again it ignores the insane ideas that have sprouted up on US owned social media platforms (Which foreign actors could influence anyway). Facebook didn't need to be owned by a hostile nation to spread conspiracy theories like Q-Anon, and that isn't even considering the damage they have done overseas. Social media sites all make content decisions that influence public perceptions.

    I can't tell if this is just cold war style fearmongering or if these politicians just prefer the US companies not face competition in the market, but it seems pretty unlikely to me that this is all in good faith.

    1. nintendoeats Silver badge

      Re: Missing the Forest for the Trees

      Not that I disagree with any of this, but I do feel that a foreign government specifically directing the presentation of conspiracy theories (even if it's just by promoting the right user-generated-content) is a lot more concerning that conspiracy theories cropping up naturally on a platform.

      Totally agree about privacy protections. They are a human right, let's make them civil.

      1. MrAptronym

        Re: Missing the Forest for the Trees

        You're right, a foreign power directing conspiracy theories (or other propaganda) is different from something organic. I don't think ownership of the platform is a necessary precondition though. Another country can still amplify harmful content on US owned platforms just from the user side as opposed to altering any suggestion algorithms. Still, platform ownership does matter there, it enables a more direct boosting of harmful content. This is definitely the best case for action on TikTok. At that point the argument is divorced from just talk about privacy and is more about what kind of regulation you should have on how platforms suggest, boost and limit content.

        I think that is a thornier and more complicated topic than privacy protections. I try and avoid algorithmically chosen content personally, but I am not sure what kind of society level actions should be taken with regard to it.

        1. nintendoeats Silver badge

          Re: Missing the Forest for the Trees

          Have you used youtube without the algorithm? Some filtering is appreciated >_>

          But yeah, it's a very complicated issue. There are lots of questions of political philosophy and practicality that have to be balanced very carefully.

          1. MrAptronym

            Re: Missing the Forest for the Trees

            I try to at least. I mostly just watch videos from a few creators I enjoy, and I manually check their channels periodically.

            Every time I open youtube on a new PC before I pog on I am kind of shocked by what the default suggestions are. It really seems bleak in that generic view!

      2. nijam Silver badge

        Re: Missing the Forest for the Trees

        ... a foreign government specifically directing the presentation of conspiracy theories ... is a lot more concerning that conspiracy theories specifically directed by the national government

  9. joed

    another distaction

    from urgent needs. A proof that elected officials are hard at work. If everyone keeps looking the other way nobody will notice sore reality (and spice will flow into worthy pockets)

  10. nautica Silver badge
    Meh

    "Just be glad you're not getting all the government you're paying for." ...

    “There is no trick to being a humorist when you have the whole government working for you.” – Will Rogers

  11. IlGeller

    Do not worry about TikTok or any other social and not so services. The new technology presented at the OpenAI will change all.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like