this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2024
618 points (97.0% liked)

Technology

59405 readers
2531 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
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 64 points 1 month ago (9 children)

It's time to start taxing the acquisition, retention, and selling/trading of personal data.

Actually, that time was 40 years ago.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

ohhh data collection taxation, I like it. You would think it would be a no-brainer but look at marijuana taxation and the continued resistance to rake in all that public funding. Would make most of the controversy around AI disappear if they tax it's collection.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago

Please ban them, I beg of you, please...

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Like Temu?

You mean like facebook and twitter.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (3 children)

No, they love those, since that data goes to the US government instead of to the CCP

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 months ago (1 children)

They're right, we should regulate or ban then too.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Technically, the second partof that bill bans sending user data to China for all companies, so it's foreseeabke that they get fined into the dirt if nothing else.

I hope the Facebook multi-billion dollar fines act as precedent.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago

Temu isn't a social media network that has been known to boost specific narratives with their algorithm. The U.S. isn't saying that China can't sell and market to the American audience, just that they'll need a supervisor if they want to mess with media.

[–] [email protected] 82 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I'm surprised so many people think this is a good argument. TikTok is a social media platform. Temu is an online marketplace. The potential to cause disruption within US society is completely different.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Not environmentally...

[–] [email protected] 48 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Legally it is a very good argument. A law targeting a single company in name or effect is literally unconstitutional. It's called a "Bill of Attainder".

The counter argument is indicting Facebook because they never stopped selling information directly to the CCP.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

A US Citizen might be protected by Article 1 Section 9, but courts have adopted a three-part test to determine if a law functions as a bill of attainder:

  1. The law inflicts punishment.
  2. The law targets specific named or identifiable individuals or groups.
  3. Those individuals or groups would otherwise have judicial protections.

And unfortunately for the CCP they fail #3 unless the Chinese owners divest and all Chinese centralization for the company gets shut down.

Also, the tiktok ban was passed alongside a bill outlawing sale of data to China, Iran, Russia, etc. So if FB is still selling to China it is also illegal.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 month ago (8 children)

You mean the CCP is not an "individual or group"?

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Cool, let's ban Temu then. Nothing of value will be lost.

In all honesty though, I disagree with banning software, and that includes TikTok. I think it's a terrible platform and I refuse to use it, but I think we need to solve the underlying problem another way, otherwise we're just picking and choosing what speech is allowed in this country. The Constitution doesn't only protect American citizens, it protects everyone.

That said, if we're going to ban one, let's ban them all. These apps haven't provided any tangible value IMO and they've arguably caused a fair amount of harm, so I'm not going to die on a hill defending them.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (4 children)

The Constitution doesn’t only protect American citizens, it protects everyone

Uh, no. It doesn't protect everyone, not by a long shot. The US constitution doesn't guarantee Chinese citizens, living in China, the right to freedom of the press.

...And this isn't about which speech they're allowing. This is about who controls the platform, and how they respond to gov't inquiries. If TikTok is divested from ByteDance, so that they're no longer based in China and subject to China's laws and interference, then there's no problem. There are two fundamental issues; first, TikTok appears to be a tool of the Chinese gov't (this is the best guess, considering that large parts of the intelligence about it are highly classified), and may be currently being used to amplify Chinese-state propaganda as well as increase political division, and second, what ByteDance is doing with the enormous amounts of data it's collection, esp. from people that may be in sensitive or classified locations.

As I stated, if TikTok is sold off so that they're no longer connected to China, then they're more than welcome to continue to operate. ByteDance is refusing to do that.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I said Facebook because we know they're doing it and you'd still have to actually prove that case.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Sure, and we should absolutely indict Facebook. And ideally our government wouldn't be so corrupt that it could indict our own government agencies from buying information from them in violation of the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 9th amendments (and probably the 14th).

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (4 children)

How about making data collection other than necessary to operate a website illegal, then making the sale of that data illegal, and absolutely require a warrant to collect it, including from FISA court?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago

I mean. Why not?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

The part that actually describes how the ban would work is at least one hyperlink away from the article.

If ByteDance doesn't sell TikTok, app stores in the US would have to drop the app, and Internet hosting services would be prohibited from providing services that enable distribution of TikTok in the US. Companies that violate the prohibition would have to pay civil penalties.

(5) INTERNET HOSTING SERVICE.—The term “internet hosting service” means a service through which storage and computing resources are provided to an individual or organization for the accommodation and maintenance of 1 or more websites or online services, and which may include file hosting, domain name server hosting, cloud hosting, and virtual private server hosting.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 months ago

So ban them too

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 months ago (4 children)

I generally think that TikTok sucks but do agree with this argument. It’s silly to say that domestic companies can be evil but foreign ones no.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago

The argument isn't that they're "evil", it's that they could be used as tools by strategic rivals.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That's not a silly argument if your argument is about national security. For the exact same reason, China blocks almost all western apps. It gives a potential route for whatever nation is considered hostile to influence your population, and TikTok has actually activated this influence at least once directly. They tried to activate their users to protest congress from passing laws restricting them.

Basically, they have the ability to influence users, and they also have the will to do so as they've already shown. In what world eould they not be a national security threat? It's also really hard for me to accept this argument from a Chinese company when China has the great firewall to "protect" it'd citizens from outside influence.

You can argue that it is not to benefit the citizens and rather just the state, which is fair. You can't reasonably argue that the state has nothing to fear.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Laws don't exist to protect the state, they exist to protect the people.

Also, what another country decides to do shouldn't really impact what we decide to do. If China blocks our apps, fine, their loss I guess. But if we start blocking their apps in retribution, that doesn't make us any better than them. We should be fighting disinformation with information. This means better education and transparent government-funded research and information. But when the US government is secretive and frequently caught spreading its own disinformation, it makes it hard for me to agree to block other countries doing the same.

TikTok should be allowed to offer its services here, but US companies shouldn't be obligated to host them on their services, and the government should publicize the negative information it has about them so journalists can help the public digest it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

National security interests are the interests of the people though.

The fundamental issue is that, assuming I'm not leaking national security information, I can say nearly anything I want on Facebook, Twitter, etc. (as long as I'm not in violation of their terms of service). The US largely does not censor people using the power of the gov't. If I am an authoritarian communist, I'm more than welcome to spread these views on any American social network that I choose without gov't interference. I can spread anti-vax and Q nonsense if I wish, and the worst-case scenario is that my neighbors will stop talking to me. I can attack the very foundation of the country if I want, as long as I'm not spreading military secrets.

This is not the case in China. Spreading pro-capitalism and pro-democracy messages can quickly get you arrested. Trying to share accurate information about what really happened in Tianamen Square in 1989 can result in you disappearing. Words and phrases are actively censored by the gov't on social media. The Chinese gov't takes a direct role in shaping social media by what it promotes, and what it forbids. Anything that's perceived as an attack on the political system of the country, the party, or any of the leaders (remember the internationally famous tennis player that abruptly disappeared when she accused a local party leader of sexual assault?) will put you at risk.

This isn't a case of, "oh, both sides are the same".

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago

Tiktok is probably used 10 times as much though (users x time on the app) and Temu isn't spreading messages in quite the same way. Comparing apples and gerbils, whataboutism, etc.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago
[–] [email protected] 103 points 2 months ago (2 children)

But you can't charge me with murder! That guy committed it too!

[–] [email protected] 34 points 2 months ago (3 children)

The argument here is more along the lines of, "you can't make a law that defines something as murder only when I do it."

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 59 points 2 months ago (2 children)

selective enforcement of the law is a real issue. One of the reasons Donald Trump will likely never go to jail is the failure to prosecute nixon, reagan (iran contra, iran hostage crisis meddling), and Bush/Cheney(wmd fiasco)

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago

And one of the reasons POC are more likely go to jail (or even gets shot) for something a white man would be let free with only a warning… At least in the “free” land.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I hate Reagan with all my heart, but in his defence there is little to no evidence Reagan knew what his subordinates were doing with Iran Contra. Those subordinates did face judgement and were not pardoned until late 2007.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Bush’s fault, got it.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 months ago (1 children)

TikTok is correct. Ban them all.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 months ago (2 children)

While i dislike tiktok as much as the next one, please do temu first. Temu might actually be the downfall of our planet that is already falling down the stairs pretty hard.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I abhor those Temu YouTube ads.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

Get an ad blocker, problem solved.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I knew someone who got caught up in their ~~pyramid~~ marketing scheme. The prizes were some low quality shit. The watch they won got badly scratched and the wristband's pin fell off the same day from regular use. It was pretty funny watching it disintegrate in real time.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›