No, it's not. The power the President is asserting might be authorized under statute, though that's actually one of the questions in dispute.
Shut em all down !
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook–Cambridge_Analytica...
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2019/09/ftc-s...
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/04/03/599069424...
If you can't give a shit about the security of your user's personal information / safety , you shouldn't exist.
You need to self regulate though and assume all data you give these companies will be sold. At this point unless it's ride sharing , apps don't get my location. If they means I can't use the apps, that's fine.
It wouldn't be the worst thing if tommorow Social Media was effectively banned. It's done enough wrong in the world
Yes they will suck during the first years, get barely enough customers to survive, but eventually they will get there with enough perseverance.
The current administration is only making everyone aware that the globalisation days are over.
Neither the companies (Q-on-Q) nor the politicians (4-6 years ) have long term incentive to do lasting change by pushing unpopular policies.
I agree that this doesn't align with the US's general approach to this sort of thing. That is a fault with the US's general approach, not with privacy protections.
It's the major reason for social media's success, not the internet. The internet was successful long before social media.
> It has allowed many companies to become extremely wealthy and invest back into the ecosystem.
What? It monopolized the ecosystem. Not the same thing.
Email's early versions weren't strongly privacy-protecting.
Most social media already obey GDPR for European users (I suspect TikTok included), so having this law in the US will benefit every user everywhere by forcing companies to treat everyone uniformly with a higher level of protection by default due to the majority of their userbase being covered by such laws.