The US' international economic dominance is predicated on a (1) pronounced lead in certain industries and (2) a simply massive economy, which combine to (3) let the US set the rules of international "fair play." The US is where you find the thing you want to buy, and the people you want to sell to. You want access? Play by our rules - everywhere.
Tik Tok does not just threaten US data. It threatens our lead in a critical industry (1), and comes from a country that minimizes the impact of US economic might (2), meaning that China can set their own rules of "fair play" (3). Banning Tik Tok isn't to protect US data; that's totally missing the point. It's to protect the American ability to set international norms.
From that lens, this is certainly hamfisted, and I certainly don't believe views it like this, but you can damn well bet the policy nerd drafting this EO is thinking this way.
I don't agree with this just on fiat from Trump, but the USA is in its rights to give Chinese the same sort of treatment that they give the USA. If you don't play by China's rules you can't be in their market, and those rules are set up to benefit China only.
In this case TikTok is getting the same treatment US tech giants have. If that is not "fair play" I don't know what is.
https://www.businessinsider.com/nba-china-feud-timeline-dary...
In one way, it's existential: the march of authoritarianism is undoubtedly accelerated by nation-states manipulating social media.
But in most others, I wouldn't get too worked up: it's more about mundane garbage ("preserving the spirit of financial disclosure processes in the context of international capital market access") - nerd sh*t.
He's saying "TikTok should not gather invasive data ... neither should US-based company".
If you oppose that, then you're basically saying "the US wants to have cake and eat it too". I guess every country for itself "works"... for a certain definition of "works".
Let's avoid regression to Chinese standard please.
It's not just a fair playing field war between US and China, but between China and rest of the world. Even India, whose companies are not allowed to operate in China under fair play rules banned TikTok only after the Chinese incursion across the LOC.
I really don't know what to make of this.
It’s why Microsoft and Apple are available in China.
Here is a Google example from when I lived in China: Google was at the time competing with Baidu over the search image market in China. My home internet was fast and with great quality. Only Google image search results had very often problems loading image previews. Its not that it "didn't work". It just failed "a little", maybe half the images in the results pag didn't load. So Google image search wasn't really blocked. It could have been total coincidence that it was like that for years and only for Google image search. The site that was coincidentally competing over the lead in the Chinese search market against a Chinese company. After some weeks, I started using Baidu image search, even though their result quality was worse. But at least it worked. I am sure many people in China did. That's "competition" in China.
They just relinquish certain strong hold to a sovereign nation, like they have to host their data center inside China (both politically important, and economically beneficial). And they also risk their data being stolen (or so they claim).
Imagine, if a Chinese company wants to operate in US but refuse to comply local regulations, what will happen to that company?
Fb, Google and others are banned from China because they refuse to cooperate. What about Tiktok?
But we use a ton of Chinese tech software and hardware outside of Tiktok, are they gonna ban them all?
And tablets. And routers. And smart TVs. Which basically encompasses pretty much all of the network-connected appliances in the average home.
(And even if a "a lost" of the rest of IoT devices don't, would you want to bet your data security on it?)
If they have enough leverage over you (or access through you to your secure systems), they will use it.
My point was, if I have to be concerned about privacy (in fact I actually am, see above) why should I fear about a foreign government while my own one is without any doubt more interested in knowing what I think? Of course should one day I become an important public figure, or a key person in some critical environment, all the data about me would suddenly become gold; that's a very valid point by another commenter. Of course my post was from the point of view of someone who doesn't plan, nor could even choose, to become one anytime soon.
(1) hence my comments where very often I argue about closed device drivers and blobs, which are the best possible place for planting spyware.
you just posted this to a social media site
The point out preferring one's data in the hands of a regime that doesn't have jurisdiction to send jack booted thugs to kick in one's door still stands.
I think you vastly overestimate 1) how much a functional human in modern society actually needs any of this garbage and 2) how much of that data and metadata is meaningful in regards to someone's privacy.
For a moment think: your data goes to China. China learns over the years about you, including something that can be used against you. At some point in future you are in a position at a company or have a government position where China has an interest in you, at that time it can use the data collected over the years to compromise you.
If you think that will never be the case, let’s go further, what about your spouse or even further your kids when they grow up.
Governments play the long game.
But I think it's possible you aren't thinking of all the contingencies that are created by a foreign government having info about people in this country.
No, because that isn't the solution to the problem being addressed. The administration doesn't want to protect privacy. It wants to ban TikTok.
Besides, this move isn't coming from the actual concern for citizens' and residents' privacy. It comes from the idea that economy and pandemic and terrible polling numbers for Trump mean he needs a distraction, as per his usual pattern. It was TikTok but it could have been catalytic converters or grandmothers or anything, just to get people talking about something else.