6 ms·

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

bluefishinit 3y ago
This level of censorship isn't good, it's very bad. It's also concerning the speed at which the government mobilized to do this. It's a rapid crackdown on free speech and individual freedom.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > censorship Nothing is being censored. If ByteDance refuses to sell, TikTok will be removed from App Stores and have to find new web hosting. TikTok.com will still resolve fine.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
    > Nothing is being censored. If ByteDance refuses to sell, TikTok will be removed from App Stores What if Google says no?
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > What if Google says no? Same as if Google says no to paying taxes. Law enforcement mediated by the courts.
    - falcolas 3y ago
      The fines end up being in the billions of dollars - $5,000 per user per day. Even Google can't absorb that for long.
  - nomel 3y ago
    Could you help me understand how that isn't censorship, with more steps?
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > Could you help me understand how that isn't censorship Censorship bans the speech. If we were censoring Bytedance, we’d block TikTok.com. This is more in the vein of “you can’t advertise your brothel at the elementary school.” You can still advertise your brothel. The distribution and amplification is just being regulated.
      - codedokode 3y ago
        If we stretch your argument to absurd then we can say that putting a political prisoner in jail also doesn't limit his free speech: he is still able to write letters.
        JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > putting a political prisoner in jail also doesn't limit his free speech: he is still able to write letters Free speech is a big topic. I would argue that yes, that person’s speech has been curtailed, but depending on what they were jailed for (saying something offensive versus stabbery) it could be reasonable. Unless they were jailed for their speech, what you describe would not amount to censorship.
    - orangecat 3y ago
      Because it's not targeting the speech. If an American company acquires TikTok it can continue to provide exactly the same content.
- EGG_CREAM 3y ago
  Trump tried to do this 4 years ago, how is that a "concerning" level of speed? The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States has been reviewing Tik Tok's Project Texas initiative to handle US data separately for 2 years. This was not an out of the blue move. The citation for those claims are in the linked article.

This level of censorship isn't good, it's very bad. It's also concerning the speed at which the government mobilized to do this. It's a rapid crackdown on free speech and individual freedom.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> censorship Nothing is being censored. If ByteDance refuses to sell, TikTok will be removed from App Stores and have to find new web hosting. TikTok.com will still resolve fine.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 3y ago
  > Nothing is being censored. If ByteDance refuses to sell, TikTok will be removed from App Stores What if Google says no?
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > What if Google says no? Same as if Google says no to paying taxes. Law enforcement mediated by the courts.
  - falcolas 3y ago
    The fines end up being in the billions of dollars - $5,000 per user per day. Even Google can't absorb that for long.
- nomel 3y ago
  Could you help me understand how that isn't censorship, with more steps?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > Could you help me understand how that isn't censorship Censorship bans the speech. If we were censoring Bytedance, we’d block TikTok.com. This is more in the vein of “you can’t advertise your brothel at the elementary school.” You can still advertise your brothel. The distribution and amplification is just being regulated.
    - codedokode 3y ago
      If we stretch your argument to absurd then we can say that putting a political prisoner in jail also doesn't limit his free speech: he is still able to write letters.
      - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > putting a political prisoner in jail also doesn't limit his free speech: he is still able to write letters Free speech is a big topic. I would argue that yes, that person’s speech has been curtailed, but depending on what they were jailed for (saying something offensive versus stabbery) it could be reasonable. Unless they were jailed for their speech, what you describe would not amount to censorship.
  - orangecat 3y ago
    Because it's not targeting the speech. If an American company acquires TikTok it can continue to provide exactly the same content.
EGG_CREAM 3y ago
Trump tried to do this 4 years ago, how is that a "concerning" level of speed? The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States has been reviewing Tik Tok's Project Texas initiative to handle US data separately for 2 years. This was not an out of the blue move. The citation for those claims are in the linked article.