• @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.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  37 months ago

                  Wonder how many people rationed their insulin in the time it took you to ask Meta what to respond.

      • @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?