7 ms·
TikTok CEO expects to defeat US ban: 'We aren't going anywhere'
- goofybozo111 2y ago[flagged]
- Jerrrry 2y agoYou would think the free market would value national security more.
- JoeAltmaier 2y agoSO, a threat. Of course. Just feeding into the idea that it's an adversary running the thing.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- Uhhrrr 2y agoWhat is the threat? In the article he says, "The facts and the Constitution are on our side and we expect to prevail again."
- tptacek 2y agoLiterally what else could he possibly say in this situation?
- tithe 2y agoI would imagine something less confrontational to Congress than effectively "Take your best shot". It's going to be interesting how this plays out, that's for sure.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> Literally what else could he possibly say in this situation? The strongest move might have been business as usual. He doesn’t have public stockholders to appease. And his users aren’t going anywhere. The only case I can see for this statement is he doesn’t totally expect to win in court and needs to politicise the question as a back-up.
- ForrestN 2y ago“We understand the concerns expressed and are committed to finding a resolution that puts the interests of our users and the American public as our top priority.” They should sell it or spin it off or whatever and make statements commensurate with that.
- remarkEon 2y agoHe could’ve said Nothing. That he’s so hostile to something that would be so financially beneficial to him makes me even more suspicious of his motives.
- stefan_ 2y agoMaybe this? https://www.deloitte.com/global/en/about/press-room/deloitte-statement-on-ukraine-deloitte-global.html https://www.deloitte.com/global/en/about/press-room/deloitte... Or this? https://investor.visa.com/news/news-details/2022/Visa-Suspends-All-Russia-Operations/default.aspx https://investor.visa.com/news/news-details/2022/Visa-Suspen... Can't go wrong with IBM? https://newsroom.ibm.com/Update-on-IBMs-Business-Operations-in-Russia https://newsroom.ibm.com/Update-on-IBMs-Business-Operations-... The legal environment changing to make continued business in country X untenable is hardly a supremely rare event.
- m3kw9 2y agoWhy not restrict it everything to be local server and have IT monitor and restrict traffic outside the country
- 10000truths 2y agoThey're already doing that with Project Texas. Oracle is the "IT".
- UncleOxidant 2y agoI recall that this was the compromise they made when Trump wanted to ban TT. Did this not address the security concerns?
- gjsman-1000 2y agoDoes he seriously think the US SCOTUS is going to override the will of 79 senators, for the sake of a company with documented ties to the Chinese Communist Party? If I was a senator, I would consider that almost treasonous. Frankly, even if you disagree with the vote, a democracy can and should be able to make such judgement calls. At that rate, the CCP should be able to buy beachfront property in California, ship military and nuclear weapons to the property, and claim that we can’t stop them because they paid the import fees.
- metalcrow 2y agoIsn't overriding the will of senators literally the point of the supreme court?
- gjsman-1000 2y agoNo. The Supreme Court exists primarily to interpret the law, reconcile laws with other laws, and address vague language or other inconsistencies. Overriding the will of senators, immediately after a bill’s passing, is very rare and threatens their perceived legitimacy. Senators can always impeach SCOTUS judges, and to do such an act begs for it.
- ceejayoz 2y agoIt is... not rare. https://constitution.congress.gov/resources/unconstitutional-laws/ https://constitution.congress.gov/resources/unconstitutional...
- gjsman-1000 2y agoConsidering Congress passes almost 500 laws per year (1229 from 2019 to 2021, 1234 [sic] from 2021 to 2023), it is a little less than 1% of cases. But that’s just the federal branch. Your list includes states and local municipalities - which makes the real number much, much lower. Much closer, arguably, to 0.1% or less of all legislation.
- CrzyLngPwd 2y agoCan anyone say what user data ByteDance might share with the Chinese government? Also, how is China an adversary? I thought the USA and China were trading partners.
- whatevaa 2y agoChina no longer wants to be an underdog and wants to be a super power itself, thus forming geopolitical rivalry with USA.
- el_don_almighty 2y agoso put your big boy pants on and compete!! Don't run under grampa Biden's rocking chair and hope he doesn't glide over your tail.
- DarkByte8 2y agoTell that to China that does not allow Facebook, Instagram and Youtube in China. They have access to 400 million americans but we can't have access to 1 billion Chinese people? China was running a long time a go
- maxglute 2y agoWestern platforms were losing to Chinese ones in PRC before they were blocked. When hammer came down to enforce onerous human moderation on ALL platforms in PRC, western platforms chose not to comply, because adding layer of human moderation at the time wasn't worth the cost/optics. This was a time when PRC domestic platforms had 10,000s of humans in the loop and western ones had essentially none. Why do you think Facebook and Google both had internal projects to re-enter PRC market after they scaled up human moderation in west? That's what fair competition is - facebook, google et al blocking what PRC gov wants blocked and handing over info on dissident according to who PRC says are dissidents. All expensive things PRC platforms has to do. AKA "fair" competitive enironment. Thinking western platforms should compete in PRC without following PRC laws is insipid. Fair would also be the TikTok/Oracle JV where Oracle responsible for US interests, like PRC has for Microsoft. Nevermind half the reason western platforms were blocked was because they were unmoderated platforms that helped organize extremist attacks that caused 2009 minority riots. It's one thing to block TikTok if TikTok allowed 9/11 and refused to do anything about it, it's another when they do what every other US platform does, but just better.
- jauntywundrkind 2y agoI kind of low key look forward to this. It's hard for me to imagine TikTok retaining even 20% of the US market share after an app store ban. But that 20% would still be a huge cultural victory for ByteDance, would be an impressive resistance. The US would really have to turn into a monster, would have to deputize a huge amount of internet services into becoming policemen to go further, and that's a horrible thing that I don't want to see. But also, I struggle to see that deputization down without a huge stink that makes congress look like foolish jerks. And it'll never work. No matter how many ISP types we conscript, there's just way too many VPNs and other capabilities out there to workaround a technical ban. Squeezing hard will sort of illuminate the futility of the act. And sort of that's my hope, that the ban becomes a lesson in futility, that sort of shows ByteDance's posture here is right (albeit at a considerable loss in market position). I want the internet to have a win here, I want democratized individual choices to triumph over tight centralized control, I want nations to not have the means. Other nations attempt elaborate control and I don't want the example of control to be proven viable here in the US. There's dark dark roads Congress & the government could go down to try to enforce this ban, but I'm kind of hoping they fail fast and fail hard. (Also reserving the right to change my mind later. I struggle to see right now how picking on one (and only one) big foreign service is justified.)
- Jezebelley 2y agoIf it's banned it'll all but die out of American popular culture. People will shift to things like YouTube Shorts instead. You can't even get the average person to understand mastodon let alone buy into a VPN subscription to circumvent regional bans.
- slowmovintarget 2y agoMeanwhile, China orders Apple to yank WhatsApp and Facebook apps from its app store in China, because, ya know... they can.
- codehalo 2y agoWho gives a shit? What's the benefit of converting the United States into China Lite?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- tantalor 2y agoDo they even have standing? The proposed "ban" is enforced on the app stores, so I could see Google or Apple have standing, if they don't want to be forced to delete an app their users like. Meanwhile tiktok.com will still work in browsers.
- joecot 2y agoThey almost certainly would have standing. Banning their app from the app store clearly directly affects them. But they could instead just allow people to login on the mobile site and install it as a progressive web app, instead of forcing them to use the app so they can track people better.
- TMWNN 2y agoMy understanding is that you and tantalor are mistaken. The bill explicitly covers using TikTok as a web app.
- tantalor 2y agoHow would that be enforced??
- underseacables 2y agoDon't you remember when the FBI seized pirating sites?
- pr337h4m 2y agoThe text of the bill literally mentioned "ByteDance Inc" and "TikTok" by name. (which makes it a bill of attainder, and thus unconstitutional)
- ceejayoz 2y agoI believe it's only a bill of attainder if it imposes criminal penalties; I think the TikTok ban is regulatory/civil. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_v._General_Services_Administration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_v._General_Services_Admi... might also matter.) > Finally, the Act did not violate the Bill of Attainder clause of the Constitution because this Act does not convict former President Nixon of a crime and does not expose him to prosecution.
- photochemsyn 2y agoCould all be a war over what datacenters get to service which customers in the end: https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/opinions/tiktoks-future-hangs-in-the-balance-so-does-its-oracle-cloud-deal/ https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/opinions/tiktoks-futur...
- nimbius 2y agoIf the US has any credibility in the context of its constitutional sanctity, then this "ban" will be declared unconstitutional by the us supreme court. if this were a poker game, ByteDance would have a full house. There is just no way they can lose this case, if only because the Citizens United ruling grants their corporation personhood.
- remarkEon 2y agoUSG has forced sales similar to this in previous years (Grindr), both without an act of Congress and without the lingering smell of national security concerns. This is different, yes, but different in that the legal case is more robust, not less.
- difosfor 2y agoI think it's a good idea for (groups of) countries to require large foreign countries to create local daughter companies to service their citizens locally. This way you can enforce your (hopefully democratic and good) laws and protect your citizens from things like spying. It's somewhat ironic that the US is raising this issue though since they do the same themselves. As far as I know their secret services are allowed to spy without restraint on anybody but American citizens. Or they are doing so anyhow.