• Afkargh@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    Interesting that Temu and AliExpress are also China owned, yet there’s no mention of any issues with them.

    • interolivary@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Well, they’re totally different platforms . The rationale behind the TikTok ban (and I’m not saying I’m in favor of it or opposed to it) is that they can do spooky spooky things with your personal data and your attention – your opinions can be nudged once there’s enough data on you and your eyeballs are on the app half the day. And just to repeat, I’m not saying I agree with the ban (well, not with banning just TikTok anyhow…)

      Temu and AliExpress have their own problems (like the absolutely mind boggling waste of finite resources) but nobody’s worried Temu is radicalizing boys or collecting tons of your personal data. And yes even Temu does collect data just like everyone else nowadays, but it’s a shopping site; compared to a social network there’s not all that much you can get out of your users or too many ways to really influence them outside of making them spend more money

      • senseamidmadness@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        The “data privacy” argument is bullshit and the people pushing for this law know it. That’s what is being sold to people but it is not why this TikTok ban got passed. It got passed because American social media companies are pissed that TikTok is outcompeting them for the attention of young people, and because the US government has a heavy hand in what algorithms are allowed to push on Facebook and Google and others. A good portion of Facebook’s initial funding came from government sources.

        “Data privacy” is just an excuse. Lobbying from the intelligence agencies and social media companies is why it’s really being enacted.

        • interolivary@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Oh yeah it absolutely is bullshit, I’m not saying that. Or, well, it is true they’re likely collecting tons of data but it’s not like US companies don’t do it too and for reasons that are probably just as bad. This is why I tend to think that if you’re going to ban TikTok for collecting data, you can’t ignore Meta, Amazon, Alphabet, Apple et al

    • Scary le Poo@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      I suggest you read the bill. It isn’t a tik tok ban. It’s actually quite a good piece of legislation.

      • Vodulas [they/them]@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        It is a vague and sprawling piece of legislation that gives money to Israel and Ukraine, makes Fentanyl more illegal, makes money laundering for fentanyl more illegal, allows seizure and use if Russian assets, restricts “foreign adversaries” from distributing and maintaining apps, restricts “foreign adversaries” from transferring data away from the US, and makes Iranian terrorism more illegal.

        It does like 3 things that are fine, but these should all be different bills (the data transfer bits, seizing Russian assets, and sending aide to Ukraine, though that is getting iffy)

        It IS a TikTok band and explicitly names ByteDance and TikTok, and also vaguely defines foreign adversaries to the point where it could be any person operating in a country that the US doesn’t like.

        “Quite a good piece of legislation” is only true if you mean quite as sprawling and good as ill defined

        • Scary le Poo@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          “sending aide to Ukraine, though that is getting iffy”

          This tells me everything I need to know. That you would even say something like this means you have no idea what you’re talking about.

          Additionally, you realize that those are all separate bills, right?

          • Vodulas [they/them]@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            This tells me everything I need to know. That you would even say something like this means you have no idea what you’re talking about.

            Really? Just writing someone off without even hearing why?

            Looks like I was mis-remembering Zelenskyy talking about moving troops into Russia, so that is the part I was iffy on. I never said they should not get the aide

            Additionally, you realize that those are all separate bills, right?

            It is one bill with 13 divisions called H.R 8038. The TikTiok part was fast tracked as an addendum to the bill. I can’t find any other bill related to it, and that is one referenced in most news outlets that I can see, but if you have more info I would love to read it.

            But even if that has evolved into it’s own separate bill, that doesn’t change the fact that “foreign adversary” is poorly defined to the point where it can be anyone residing in a country deemed as an adversary. That means even say a rando in Cuba puts out an app with no ties to the Cuban government it would be illegal to have that app in the US. The bill also still names TikTok explicitly, so it is still a TikTok ban (with the exception that they sell, which they are unlikely to do).