But a "kill switch" doesn't address the issue. I mean while it's "killed" it does but whenever it's not, the data privacy concerns are in full swing.
Yes, good thing all our data is now perfectly private. No corporations sucking it up and selling it to databrokers who then launder it to the CCP. Now that tik tok is gone, our privacy is completely protected!
Hell if it isn't being sold, it's being hacked. How many major data beaches have there been? My identity keeps getting stolen, accounts hacked. Did you know that entirely too many major CC companies will reset your account password and security question over the phone using data that is in those leaks?
This is like when people complain that measures directed to lessen global warming don't solve it and say they're useless.
Exactly.
Isn't US tiktok data hosted on US servers only?
That's largely irrelevant unless a gov employee is going to sit behind everyone with server access and make sure nothng is ever touched in an Unlogged unapproved way no?
Yeah, I remember reading an article that said the data wasn't necessarily directly accessible by the mothership overseas, but there isn't anything stopping employees from sending the info themselves, which IIRC is what happened.
I thought that was happening. But I might be mistaken.
Whether true or not there are back doors , as there will always be no matter where it's hosted. Unless we got access to the full source code .
Yes the source code was disclosed too.
I did a quick search to make sure I am not crazy people sure make me feel that way
The law has been introduced because of concerns TikTok might share US user data with the Chinese government - claims it and ByteDance have always denied.
That was never the major issue.
It's about the Chinese Government tweaking the algorithm to very subtly shift public opinion. Something we know they're doing already.
No they don't care about that. They know foreign governments do that all the time on Facebook, YouTube, Reddit, etc. This is about protecting lobbyists' business interests, and right now the biggest lobbyists and campain contributors are also tik tok's competitors.
Posting things to a site, is fundamentally different from actually owning the site; And adjusting the algorithm to promote or suppress specific ideas. Foreign governments don't have that ability. Not in the domestic US versions anyway.
There are several reasons to do it. Lobbyist are another.
Sure they do.
Even if tik tok was nakedly controlled by the Chinese government, who gives a shit? I can go over to RT (Russia Today) right now and get fed Russian propaganda. Hell, until 2022 I could add it to my cable package. I can to this day still get it as a satellite TV option. If the concern is "foreign government may influence public opinion on a platform they control" then the US has a lot of banning to do.
But we don't because free speech is a thing and we're free to consume whatever propaganda we want.
We gave up that principle because "China bad" (and the CCP is, to be clear). But instead of passing laws around data privacy, or algorithmic transparency, or a public information campaign to get kids off of tik tok, the US government went straight to "The government will decide what information your allowed to consume, we know what's best for you" and far too many people are cheering.
Besides, the point your making is bullshit anyway given the kill switch mechanism Tik Tok offered.
TikTok was banned because 1) China bad, and 2) Tik Tok is eating US social media companies lunch. Facebook and Twitter and Google throw some campaign donations at the politicians that killed their biggest rival, and the politicians calculate that more people hate tik tok than like it (or care about preventing government censorship if the thing being censored is something they don't like). It's honestly one of the grossest things I seen dems support lately.
It was always about butthurt Trump opening the floodgates on the idea of banning it after TikTokers kept attacks on him trending.
It's brainwashed lunacy to the point of propaganda to continually claim it's over China using the platform to sway public opinion. They can and do use EVERY platform to do that.
You think even Lemmy is immune?
There is a substantial difference between posting content to a platform trying to influence people, and actually changing the platform algorithm to surface or suppress ideas a foreign (or even domestic) state likes or doesn't.
Lemmy certainly doesn't have the second type. And even american commercial social media sites don't really do it for a specific political agenda; For them it's only about whatever's more profitable.
Lemmy is an open system in and of itself, and the resultant platform algorithms are open by design, it's just wishful nonsense to think a state actor can't 'surface or suppress' ideas even here with a little effort.
And even american commercial social media sites don’t really do it for a specific political agenda
Oh my sweet summer child, we're at the coercion of news media redux for social media...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_surveillance_in_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens%27_Commission_to_Investigate_the_FBI
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/hearings/ciasuseofjournal00unit.pdf
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp91-00901r000500050029-0
How could you post so many links about social media influence on politics and miss the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal
Good catch, I got interrupted with work mid post, thats probably the most notable example for sure.
And all of those examples are about parts of the US government stopping other parts of the same government from trying to get our corporations to do what they want. China has no system to control itself like that. It doesn't have to ask BiteDance anything; They own it and would shut it down in a heartbeat if they couldn't absolutely control it.
What?
Those examples are after-it-actually-happened reports of the US government actively getting corporations to do what they want.
Get your head out of the sand.
I don't trust China, but I'm not going to lie to myself to feel better about a political hitjob, even if Bytedance has it's multinational corporate governance primarily under China.
Kapersky is the example you want to point at for an example of a bad actor corp capturing classified data and sending it to an adversarial government. TikTok just trended anti-political messages for a few different popular politicians and lit a match as a result.
Kapersky is the example you want to point at for an example of a bad actor corp capturing classified data and sending it to an adversarial government.
Not talking about collecting or sharing data.
TikTok just trended anti-political messages for a few different popular politicians and lit a match as a result.
There's no real evidence they did.
Even if they did, that's not a good enough reason to cut them off, though it is the reason many politicians want to; That, and the Israeli apartheid / genocide stuff.
But again, there's no evidence ByteDance and TickTok is doing anything about those topics.
Did you read the article I linked to?
It is the NYTimes, I get it if you didn't; Their paywall's annoying.
Here's a Kagi summary:
A report from the Network Contagion Research Institute at Rutgers University found that topics often suppressed by the Chinese government, such as Tibet, Hong Kong protests, and the Uyghur population, are unusually underrepresented on TikTok compared to Instagram. This raises concerns that Beijing may be influencing content on the popular video platform, which is owned by the Chinese company ByteDance. TikTok disputed the report's methodology and claims of content suppression. The Israel-Hamas conflict has reignited scrutiny of how social media platforms like TikTok moderate content, with some Republican lawmakers calling to regulate or ban the app. Researchers have been urging TikTok to provide access to data to study the spread of information on the platform.
They're just mad they can't do a genocide without being called out by the youths. If anything, the American social media companies are the ones to watch out for because they're actively suppressing news on the content, the thing we're pretending to be worried that the Chinese government will do to this app.
Chinese spyware: 🙅♀️⛔️❌️🤬🤬😤👿✊️💣🧨💣💥💥💥
American spyware: 😊😊💖😍🐰🐱😻😻🌸🌹🌷
If I had a choice between U.S. Constitutional law versus Chinese Politburo arbitration about what consequences can happen if my life gets destroyed by using TikTok, I can at least talk to the fucking elected U.S. official face-to-face to complain without going to jail.
Tiktok offered us the ability to shut them down? To avoid being shut down. By us. Woe to the vanquished I guess.
The idea is that with the "kill switch" the US Government would take any blame for the shutdown. Right now the Biden Admin and Congress have successfully switched that around so TikTok looks more unreasonable. There's no demand that they "shut down", just that ownership be located where they are subject to US law.
We embedded third party auditors in that crypto exchange so I'm curious exactly how inscrutable tiktok really are.
I mean the accusations are that they're too beyond oversight and we can't confidently audit the data, so giving us a button to stop them when we can't see what they're doing would be a joke. But I'm skeptical that it's as difficult to lock down their data as we make it seem.
That was about money, this is about controlling speech.
Didn't they already reveal their source code to American companies, like Oracle ? If people say they're worried China can manipulate the algorithms, then Oracle will let the US know. What else can they do?
Imagine the president walking around with 2 buttons now, one for nucular weapons and one for tiktok.
"Fire ze missilee"
"But I am Le Tired"
"OK. Turn off tiktok. Then fire ze MISSILES"
Jibjab!
The government is so fucking stupid sometimes. I think both ideas are bad, but a kill switch would be so much better strategically than selling it to a third party who could just send the data to China anyway and still be influenced by CCP demands.
I feel like from the beginig forcing sale was the goal so a US entity has a chance to pick up part of the number one social media for cheaepr than the open market because when a sale is forced sellers lose leverage.
You seriously think this is simply a trick to obtain tiktok for a cheaper price?? who the fuck upvotes this shit?
It’s not about sending the data to China it’s about not allowing a hostile power maintain control of a major lever that directly impacts a huge swath of the us demographics.
Hate it or love it but TikTok algorithms hold an insane amount of power to influence a gigantic age range and the goal here is to get those in control of said algorithms under US law so it can be regulated properly.
Yes, us bad, but there is logic and value here. No it’s not the perfect solution but we can’t do nothing either. TikTok showing oracle the source code doesn’t do shit to address these issues.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/21/business/tiktok-china.html
And a kill switch wouldn't have made that not an issue?
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.