• Melllvar
    link
    fedilink
    English
    92 months ago

    It’s not ok.

    But the fact is that China, North Korea, Iran, and Russia are adversaries of the United States, and the US government is justified in its concern.

    • AmbiguousProps
      link
      English
      32 months ago

      They didn’t seem to care much when Cambridge Analytica happened, and that was a foreign adversary. So what’s different here?

      • Melllvar
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        The United Kingdom is not an adversary of the United States. In fact it’s one of our closest allies. But, if anything, that suggests this law isn’t enough, not that it’s too much.

        • AmbiguousProps
          link
          English
          52 months ago

          I meant that the data they collected was breached by a foreign adversary, thought that was pretty clear but guess not.

          • Melllvar
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            And the fact that a foreign adversary obtained this information was very bad, agreed? Clearly, it makes sense to take steps to keep that kind of information out of adversarial hands.

            • AmbiguousProps
              link
              English
              52 months ago

              Yes, my point was this only affects one of them. It doesn’t fix the root of the problem, because that’s not the bill’s target.

              In fact, if TikTok remains, and does get banned, it just makes it so they no longer have to listen to the US government for anything.

              • Melllvar
                link
                fedilink
                English
                02 months ago

                The law affects social media apps based in North Korea, China, Iran, and Russia. These four countries are already restricted from participating in sensitive areas of the US economy, with forced sale being an option. The only really novel part of this law is applying such restrictions to software.

                • AmbiguousProps
                  link
                  English
                  42 months ago

                  You’re missing my point. The adversaries have many more avenues than just TikTok (like breaching the domestic companies that collect the data). The law is too specific and therefore does not actually protect us in any real way, at least not on a personal level.

                  • Melllvar
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    02 months ago

                    It’s not too specific, it’s narrowly tailored. Which is one of the things it needs to be in order to survive a 1st amendment challenge.

        • AmbiguousProps
          link
          English
          4
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          A foreign adversary was responsible for the theft of the data that Cambridge shouldn’t have had. That was what I meant.

          • BuelldozerA
            link
            32 months ago

            I saw that farther down in the chain which is why I came back and deleted my comment.

    • Inui [comrade/them]
      link
      fedilink
      -32 months ago

      What’s China gonna do to me all the way over here? People should be worried about their own government spying on them first.

      • Melllvar
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 months ago

        With the sort of detailed personal profile a social media app has on you, they could target your specific beliefs, religious convictions, sexual preferences, political affiliation, fears, interests, desires, etc. to manipulate your opinion in their interests. Doing this on a population-wide scale is what social media platforms are all about (i.e. targeted advertising). It’s wise to be concerned about an adversary having such a tool at its disposal. And this is true for all countries, not just the US.