Hacker News Reader

Comment by mullingitover | Hacker News Reader

I never really understood the panic over TikTok. Is the fear about security, or is the fear that China might actually have successful social media product in the US?

View on HN

Speaking personally, here's why TikTok concerns me: TikTok is a Chinese business, and China has shown no limit to how much it will meddle in the affairs of and even take control of Chinese businesses for the furthering of the Chinese state's agenda.

Simultaneously, TikTok has captured the daily attention spans of millions of Americans, many of them especially young and impressionable. They've captured their attention in the form of a black box algorithm that promotes content in whichever way TikTok deems most appropriate.

These two facts mean that the Chinese government now has direct access to the brains of millions of young Americans, with zero oversight. Imagine China subtly promoting videos to create outrage and civil unrest in the US, or to feed anti-US propaganda to germinate terrorist groups in the US. These might sound like far flung possibilities, but I think it's hard to say what a country that views the US as its enemy (politically, economically, philosophically) might do with that kind of power, and I don't think we can wait to find out.

Does China really identify as "a country that views the US as its enemy (politically, economically, philosophically)" or is that just a projection of how the US feels about China?

Absolutely. China does not recognize even the idea of Human Rights, let alone their implementation. What do you think the Great Chinese Firewall is for? Shutting out all those ideas from the rest of the world that are deemed hostile to the ruling party's ideology.

There have also been reports that the Chinese use all the behavioral data reaped from TikTok as input for training their own surveillance and censorship ML. The international user base is involuntarily turned into fuel for the totalitarian Chinese oppression machinery.

"Imagine China subtly promoting videos to create outrage and civil unrest in the US, or to feed anti-US propaganda to germinate terrorist groups in the US."

our president is doing a fine job of that now with his twitter account.

Right, but we have the ability to vote him out of office. We don't have the same oversight of the content the Chinese Communist Party wants to put in the minds of young Americans, besides banning the app.

Or, you know, our mainstream media exclusively broadcasting videos without contextualization of white police officers killing black men to the country and ignoring all other racial configurations of violence in order to stoke racial tension.

and according to many, his election was partially a result of foreign tampering

> These two facts mean that the Chinese government now has direct access to the brains of millions of young Americans, with zero oversight. Imagine China subtly promoting videos to create outrage and civil unrest in the US, or to feed anti-US propaganda to germinate terrorist groups in the US. These might sound like far flung possibilities, but I think it's hard to say what a country that views the US as its enemy (politically, economically, philosophically) might do with that kind of power, and I don't think we can wait to find out.

Ironically this idea is one of the rationale behind the GFW. Dont want any Spring/colour revolution over there.

> They've captured their attention in the form of a black box algorithm that promotes content in whichever way TikTok deems most appropriate.

Ugh no. TikTok's recommendation algorithm works the way it does because of its userbase's preference. TikTok is NOT free to change it willy-nilly. At best TikTok can "steer" the algorithm.

> Imagine China subtly promoting videos to create outrage and civil unrest in the US, or to feed anti-US propaganda to germinate terrorist groups in the US.

I mean, Youtube[1] and Facebook[2] already do this, and nobody has a problem with it. Do foreign-owned businesses not have first amendment rights?

I should also point out that honest journalistic reporting of the reality in the US is more than sufficient to create outrage and civil unrest in the US.

[1] https://techcrunch.com/2020/01/28/study-of-youtube-comments-...

[2] https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanhatesthis/the-far-r...

> Imagine China subtly promoting videos to create outrage and civil unrest in the US, or to feed anti-US propaganda to germinate terrorist groups in the US.

Restricting foreign media based on "propaganda" fears is not a behavior that free societies engage in.

Does this mean China is correct in censoring information and social networks?

The fear is that any large Chinese project holding the personal data of Americans is inherently a security concern. It wouldn't be a big issue if Tiktok were French or Korean or something.

This is exactly it. There's widespread fear that China is buying its way into the personal data of billions through its state-sponsored businesses like Huawei and ByteDance.

Is TikTok really state-sponsored? Do you have any source?

It's not that ByteDance, owners of TikTok, are especially state-sponsored (though given the treasure trove of user data they're sitting on, especial isn't a stretch of the imagination): all Chinese corporations are either actively overseen by a CCP committee or potentials to be.

See https://thediplomat.com/2019/12/politics-in-the-boardroom-th...

The CEO and cofounder has gone on record (https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/12/05/tiktok-..., linking to a parent source https://chinamediaproject.org/2018/04/11/tech-shame-in-the-n...) pledging that he'd run the company in accordance with socialist values and the principles of Xi Jinping Thought. The degree of financial relationship is unknown and probably unknowable, but it seems clear that ByteDance feels obligated to behave how the government wants.

Even if TikTok was openly promoting socialism - so what? The constitution doesn't split hairs about free speech. We're free to use speech to promote the political philosophy of our choosing in this country. The antidote to 'bad' speech, as per the constitution, is more speech, not to outlaw the speech you don't like.

There's nothing wrong with speech we don't like, unless (as in this case) it's made at the direction of a foreign government. There's long-standing precedent for preventing that kind of thing.

> There's nothing wrong with speech we don't like, unless (as in this case) it's made at the direction of a foreign government.

I mean, we don't ban China Daily. Also, and I'm going to have to check with someone who uses TikTok, but I don't think the Chinese government is giving orders to TikTok users about what to songs they're supposed to dance to on any given day.

> Also, and I'm going to have to check with someone who uses TikTok, but I don't think the Chinese government is giving orders to TikTok users about what to songs they're supposed to dance to on any given day.

They could, though. China is welcome to repeal those laws if they don't want the rest of the world to assume that they use them...

The government of China doesn't have a First Amendment right to free speech in the United States.

It's a huge relief that ByteDance is not the government of China. What level of foreign ownership makes a company purely foreign controlled? If funds controlled by Chinese nationals bought stakes in Facebook/Twitter/Alphabet, wouldn't that put them in the same category? What portion of ByteDance would have to be owned by non-Chinese people before it would be in the clear?

The premise of why a Chinese company(ies) should be singled out in this way is that China is a totalitarian state where people and corporations are subject to the absolute will of the Communist Party so "ByteDance is not the government of China" isn't going to convince anyone who believes this action is justified.

If Facebook/Twitter/Alphabet were to be acquired by Chinese interests that would almost certainly be blocked by CFIUS just like the potential Broadcom/Qualcomm acquisition was a couple years ago.

Should the US also ban foreign TV shows, music, books originated from totalitarian states? Because the producers are subject to the will of their governments and might be compelled into spreading propaganda although it has not happen?

I personally believe that freedom will prevail and this kind of race to the bottom towards censorship and executive branch unilateralism is sad.

Should it? No, I don't think so. But I do think restricting Xinhua or KCNA is different from restricting the BBC or Le Monde or whatever.

> What level of foreign ownership makes a company purely foreign controlled?

Whatever level allows them to dictate behavior.

> If funds controlled by Chinese nationals bought stakes in Facebook/Twitter/Alphabet, wouldn't that put them in the same category?

Of course.

> What portion of ByteDance would have to be owned by non-Chinese people before it would be in the clear?

Of far more significant is whether ByteDance's leadership are subject to Chinese jurisdiction.

I think there is also the impression that, even if china has not already been leaning on TikTok, if they ever did TikTok would necessarily relent. Whereas in the US we have examples of companies (e.g. apple) denying requests from the Feds.

Now I'm not saying this is necessarily true, but I think that is where the concern is coming from.

TikTok has been caught violating COPPA. One of my kids recently signed up for TikTok without any age verification using their Android Google account, which then shares their email address with TikTok which is clear violation of COPPA. Nothing is being done to prevent this. TikTok actively caters to underage youth and most of the community is about producing provocative dance videos. In the end, TikTok is full of underage kids being provocative and is a cesspool and playground for pedophiles.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com