• @stonerboner
    link
    647 months ago

    I’d counter that basing your livelihood on an app that harvests your and your viewers data for an adversarial government known to use this kind of data in psyops isn’t a sound business idea.

    In fact, I’d say this bill actually protects American users who have been using the app.

    If TikTok can’t prove that they use our data responsibly, and refuse to do so to the point of just leaving the market, we are all better off. Another company will fill that void and content creators have endless options to move to.

    I don’t think “but people need to make money while our data is harvested and provided to a government that uses it against us” is a great argument.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      177 months ago

      They passed the bill because someone is getting a cut. It isn’t to protect the public. If they wanted to protect the public we would have universal healthcare and a ban on guns.

      • @stonerboner
        link
        77 months ago

        I disagree. I listened when it was presented to Congress. I read a good amount of the data justifying the required transfer. If you don’t think this bill protects the public, there really is no reasoning with you.

        Someone will get a cut specifically because TikTok chooses not to prove where their data flows. They had a choice, and chose to exit the market.

        But sure, you can frame it like we forced them to leave the market, which isn’t the case. They could have verified their data flow and remained if they were not abusing it.

          • @stonerboner
            link
            57 months ago

            Taking longer than it should.

            Any other completely unrelated questions you’d like to ask?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              57 months ago

              Unrelated? We were talking about protecting the public and you are talking about a stupid fucking app where people learn dance moves from.

              Who are you brought to you by? Meta or Alphabet or Reddit or X?

              • @stonerboner
                link
                67 months ago

                What does the issue we are talking about (TikTok’s data harvesting) have to do with healthcare? Unless that’s where you get your magic crystal healing tips lmao

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  57 months ago

                  You said it was to protect the public. This is involved in protecting the public. You claim Congress did this to protect the public so I am asking you when your friends are going to really protect the public.

                  You can just admit that some Congress people got a cut to do this and it has nothing to do with protecting us against the big bad Asians. While we are on the topic I think it’s fucked up that the government, and it’s internet lackeys, want me to hate the Chinese.

                  • @stonerboner
                    link
                    67 months ago

                    The pedantry emanating from you is palpable.

                    You can just admit that protecting the public comes in many forms and one law won’t fix unrelated areas.

                    But you won’t, because you have a hate boner for our shitty oligarchy. You can also pretend like TikTok didn’t have a chance to prove they don’t misuse our data, but chose to exit the market rather than reveal where our data goes. The “cut” you bemoan, if it’s even true, would only occur due to TikTok’s choice.

                    But sure, they only passed a law after giving the company a chance to comply so they could get a pay cut. Genius.

          • @stonerboner
            link
            47 months ago

            You can literally watch the congressional hearings yourself.

            Here’s one video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhKX8zF2FQw

            I watched it live, so I don’t know how complete or edited this recording of the hearing is. Talk to you in 5.5 hours after you watch the thing you requested.

              • @stonerboner
                link
                77 months ago

                Lmao I must have struck a nerve to get 7 replies from you.

                You keep returning to your red herring because you don’t actually have a decent argument.

                I bet you’re really mad at some internet stranger, maybe you should take a break

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              27 months ago

              Can you at least try and clarify what in the hearings convinced you so much? I’ve seen some of these hearings. Some of them are complete BS political threater.

              I mean, what would you have liked to see that would’ve proved the data is treated exactly the same as every other American company that harvests our data?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      167 months ago

      It’s cute how you think that the only government that’s using our own data against us is china. Might want to step back and look at our own government, then apply your same line of thinking to all big tech companies in existence right now.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        24
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Exactly: banning TikTok is nothing more than a good start. We need to destroy Facebook, Twitter and Reddit next.

        • AmbiguousProps
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          That will never happen, at least not in this way. Because it wasn’t anything to do with their data collection, or their company structure. Congress is happy to allow domestic data collection and want Americans addicted to American apps so that they get a cut.

      • @stonerboner
        link
        21
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        You’re extremely dull if youre suggesting I don’t know data is abused left and right all over the place. But if TikTok is so bad it’s can’t even fit within our abusive system, it deserves to transfer or exit.

        You’re missing the forest for the trees.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          87 months ago

          And you aren’t even reading what I wrote. In no post did I defend tiktok… I merely stated that what it is doing is also being done by american based companies and they should be addressed as well.

          • @stonerboner
            link
            37 months ago

            No doubt, but accountability starts somewhere, so why have a problem with this? Why not celebrate and then demand equitable action domestically?

            “I’m not defending TikTok. I’m just bemoaning action being taken against them because bad things happen with other companies!” Not a great look.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              57 months ago

              Where did I say I had a problem with this? So much knee jerking in here. I am stating that lawmakers should apply these same laws to our own social media. The same lawmakers who will most likely profit off this decision.

              • @stonerboner
                link
                27 months ago

                Then you should write and call those lawmakers. You are a part of the body that elects them. Or run for office and fight the good fight yourself.

                I do hope we do get some domestic reform, but I’m able to separate this small foreign policy win from the huge need for comprehensive domestic policy.

            • AmbiguousProps
              link
              fedilink
              English
              4
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              Because this isn’t accountability? It won’t start any change with domestic companies, because it doesn’t apply to them. This isn’t the start of anything. If you think they’re going to use this as the starting point for actual privacy legislation, you’re very ignorant of how congress works.

              Data collection will still happen domestically, and another Cambridge Analytica will happen, so long as domestic data brokers are legal.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              37 months ago

              How about we start with universal healthcare and then we worry about children learning dancing, right here in River City

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        67 months ago

        It’s cute how you think many of us haven’t applied that big thinking to all big tech. A Facebook, Snapchat, and Twitter ban absolutely should happen.

    • AmbiguousProps
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      It’s never been to protect the public. If that were the case, the law wouldn’t apply to just TikTok and foreign companies. They would’ve passed something to protect us from our own domestic data brokers too, but they didn’t.

      • @stonerboner
        link
        97 months ago

        It’s almost like an action can protect people and enrich elites at the same time. Explain how the American public isn’t better of keeping their personal data away from the CCP. Interested to see how you think this doesn’t protect the public at all from an adversarial foreign government.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          97 months ago

          When you could just generalize the law to include protecting us from our own oligarchs and they did not, it clearly shows who they work for.

          • @stonerboner
            link
            67 months ago

            We could also feed the poor, house the homeless, heal the sick etc. we could ask why any law regarding healthcare, housing, nutrition doesn’t fix the issue, but that’s a whole other can of worms.

            The FTC is putting in work this administration, and are poised to bring back Net Neutrality (obligatory Fuck Ajit Pai). This is a huge step towards protecting all Americans, so I think you’re confusing this issue (adversarial governments harvesting our data) with the larger issue of domestic policy (which will be much harder to tackle).

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              57 months ago

              Let’s open the can of worms. Right here right now.

              If the goal of a law is to keep people safe should we pass laws that do that or pass laws that don’t? Answer the question.

              If goal is X should we try to get X or try to get Y?

              Really really simple and you should manage it. Come on brought-to-you-buy-Meta, simple question I am sure you can answer it.

              • @stonerboner
                link
                97 months ago

                Ah, a red herring.

                According to you, there should be only one law that protects people and protects them fully. If the law is specific to a sector, it’s bad because saving people’s data doesn’t give them healthcare. And if it doesn’t protect people in other sectors (foreign vs domestic) then it can’t possibly be a good move.

                It’s an all-or-nothing mentality that is extremely idealistic to the point of ignoring incremental progress, and will make it so that no law is ever good or enough.

                Stopping the bleeding of data harvesting to China is good. If you want other change alongside it, hold your elected officials to it.

                There’s really no point in continuing a discussion with such an idealistic purist, as no law can be good enough.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          67 months ago

          It’s almost like we don’t have universal healthcare. Are your BFFS in Congress going to fix that soon or are they busy banning a stupid dancing app?

          • @stonerboner
            link
            67 months ago

            Lmao “BFFS.” You love making me into whatever you want to rail against.

            Congress didn’t ban an app. They requested data on where their information flows, and the “stupid dancing app” opted to leave the market instead of comply.

            You don’t even know what the fuck you’re going on about haha

        • AmbiguousProps
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Their personal data won’t be kept away from the CCP. People that use TikTok will use VPNs to do so if needed (TikTok also would no longer have to listen to the US government, probably intensifying the data collection), and otherwise the CCP can just purchase (or steal) the data from US data brokers, because those are still very much legal. Did we forget about Cambridge Analytica, where an adversarial foreign government used our own domestic companies against us?

          • @stonerboner
            link
            77 months ago

            I bet less than 2% of users use VPNs. They won’t have much content, if any, from domestic creators. They’ll only be interacting with the other 2% of American users along with foriegn content.

            I don’t think people with enough brain cells to use VPN will are China’s target demographic, and I don’t think VPN users will constitute a fraction of activity you are suggesting they will.

            I really like how you point out the danger of the Cambridge Analytica incident, but then bemoan trying to keep data harvesting away from a foreign adversary.

            Domestic data policy drastically needs an overhaul, but we have to start somewhere. Also, Cambridge Analytica had a fucking shitstain president/administration running interference because they benefited directly from it. Glad we have accountability this time around.

            • AmbiguousProps
              link
              fedilink
              English
              37 months ago

              I bet less than 2% of users use VPNs

              TikTok users or in general? Either way, it’s higher than that, and will only increase with bills like this (and the many state-issued porn bans).

              I don’t think people with enough brain cells to use VPN

              VPNs aren’t hard to use, by design. Do you really think people need in-depth tutorials on how to press a button in an app? Also, there’s already people demonstrating VPN use on TikTok, for if the ban actually happens.

              I really like how you point out the danger of the Cambridge Analytica incident, but then bemoan trying to keep data harvesting away from a foreign adversary.

              You have very black and white thinking. I’m bemoaning it because it doesn’t actually protect US citizens. It doesn’t stop China from harvesting our data, and it doesn’t stop domestic companies either. But good try, trying to belittle the massive data breaches that have happened without TikTok’s help.

              Domestic data policy drastically needs an overhaul, but we have to start somewhere.

              Once again, this isn’t the start of that. Congress is more than happy to allow domestic companies to harvest our data, because half of the time they’re getting a cut. This will not open any doors for future privacy bills. The only possibility with this is that congress crafts another targeted bill to get rid of another company for whatever reason.

              Also, Cambridge Analytica had a fucking shitstain president/administration running interference because they benefited directly from it.

              Interesting that you’d bring that up, seeing as congress just set this precedent for banning companies right before that shitstain has a real chance of getting into office. Do you really want the Trump administration to pass a bill like this for another company?

              • @stonerboner
                link
                57 months ago

                I’m stating than less than 2% of American TikTok users will use VPN to bypass TikTok leaving the market.

                You’re crazy if you think VPN usage is high among the general public on a regular basis. And that number’s intersection with using a VPN to specifically work around this will be extremely low.

                I absolutely stand by holding TikTok responsible, and any other company responsible. This, coupled with the FTC poised to bring back Net Nuetrality, is a great step in the right direction. I look forward to this energy setting up more data protection, foreign and domestic.

                • AmbiguousProps
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  3
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  I’m stating than less than 2% of American TikTok users will use VPN to bypass TikTok leaving the market.

                  Now you can predict the future with such certain statistics? First of all, more TikTok users than that already use VPNs. So you’re already incorrect.

                  You’re crazy if you think VPN usage is high among the general public on a regular basis. And that number’s intersection with using a VPN to specifically work around this will be extremely low.

                  VPN usage wasn’t all that high, before porn bans happened. Once those started, US searches for VPNs drastically spiked. Once again, it will happen with TikTok. They’re literally already discussing this on the platform, I’m not sure how else to tell you this.

                  and any other company responsible.

                  You sure don’t seem like it. It seems like you’ve got your blinders on to exactly who those other companies are. This bill will not lead to positive domestic privacy changes, because it is focused on “foreign adversaries”. It won’t open the door, because the whole reason this was able to pass in the first place is because the republicans have a huge hate boner for TikTok exclusively. Kind of like yourself.

                  This, coupled with the FTC poised to bring back Net Nuetrality, is a great step in the right direction.

                  While I was happy to hear about that earlier, this doesn’t really apply to this conversation.

                  I look forward to this energy setting up more data protection, foreign and domestic.

                  Congress doesn’t care about protecting our data domestically. You’ll turn to dust by the time they actually give a shit about that.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      47 months ago

      Another company will fill that void

      Yay, more YouTube and Instagram. What we always wanted. Can’t wait to have maybe one day Meta and Alphabet will combine so we can only have one service!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      47 months ago

      That’s not how due process and liberal democracy works. The government has to prove you’re doing it. Setting any precedent that you have to prove you’re not doing something (an impossible task) is incredibly dangerous.