607
submitted 8 months ago by ZeroCool@slrpnk.net to c/technology@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Hildegarde@lemmy.world 65 points 8 months ago

Did you read the article? The bill bans tiktok for being foreign. There is nothing in this article that describes a bill that outlaws any practices, conventions, or actions that tiktok has done.

Being afraid of foreigners for being foreign is not effective regulation.

[-] Trantarius@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 8 months ago

The bill itself says, more or less, "any foreign adversary controlled app is banned. Also, TikTok is a foreign adversary controlled app". So it doesn't apply exclusively to TikTok, but it does explicitly include them.

[-] ICastFist@programming.dev 10 points 8 months ago

Interesting wording there, "foreign adversary controlled", goes a long way to protect all the companies that are based in tax havens, or controlled by foreign allies, like Saudi Arabia or Israel

[-] dumpsterlid@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

In a democracy one of the very most important choices that must be made by citizens is what other nations are considered allies or an enemies.

The funny thing is that US citizens have absolutely zero control over who the government decides is our enemy or ally. That aspect of government is entirely partitioned off as separate from the “democracy”, as if the foreign policy element of our government was itself a foreign nation we have no control over.

While we are on the topic, fuck the government of Saudi Arabia and Israel, both governments are horrendously violent.

[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 8 points 8 months ago

The point is that companies like Google and Facebook do the same data harvesting and manipulation but aren't being held to the same standard. The law is clearly written to benefit the US government not the citizens, while the justification is stated to be 'for the benefit of the citizens.' It's like buying your wife a lawn tractor for her birthday even though you know she has no interest in using one. You're claiming it's for her but it's really for you.

[-] dumpsterlid@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

The lawn tractor was for my wife’s boyfriend actually, but thanks for just assuming I was being selfish.

[-] Liz@midwest.social 8 points 8 months ago

I think most of us here are concerned with foreign adversary interference as much as we are concerned with corporate interference and espionage. The law seems to only address the surface level issue (ownership) and none of the actual problems (action).

this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
607 points (97.5% liked)

Technology

59670 readers
1604 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS