Yes, of course we should ban TikTok
noahpinion.substack.com
noahpinion.substack.com
Similarly, Google was banned in 2010 following disputes over censorship of search queries, that the Chinese government wanted but Google refused to oblige by.
And competitive brinksmanship, xenophobia, and walled isolation aren't useful unless you're running DPRK.
I don't think the walled isolation claim sticks - the US would not be seeking to isolate itself. Instead, it would be requiring both countries to operate on the same playing field. Why would anyone want to play a game when the other side won't agree to the same rules?
We have an unequal trade with China where they ban western companies but their companies do what they want even while being state controlled under a hostile regime. This alone is a good reason to ban any Chinese social media company
State-level censorship of apps the public can use should not be entertained in a free and open society.
> State-level censorship of apps the public can use should not be entertained in a free and open society.
Yes it should. The government is reponsible for regulating commerce, especially by foreigners. The whole point of the ban is that tiktok's owners are not in a free society and cannot take advantange of the benefits of a free society while escaping its responsibilities and their country being openly hostile/
Even within the US the government can block and ban facebook if facebook is in violation of any laws or is acting in aid of a foreign hostile government.
You don't understand free speech or liberty. They both come with responsibility and commerce is a regulated privilege. Tiktok can become a non-profit app and sniff all your data all it wants. In a free society, a hostile foreign government has exactly zero rights.
In an open society, people are free to use apps regardless of who may or may not be behind them. That's the price of freedom: bad actors, unpleasant words, unpopular views, and the freedom to be a jerk.
Surely you jest.
> A free and open society gives people the choice to use whatever they want within sensible bounds
Right. It's people not China and the CCP. Tiktok can still exist outside of the US and serve content to US visitors. ISPs will not block it. But the company itself which is operated by people associated with the CCP cannot operate and make profit in the US.
If you like tiktok you can still use it.
But even if ISPs banned tiktok, the restriction is intended to harm tiktok, you can't reasonably argue that the US is trying to prevent its people from accessing legitimate tiktok content. Matter of fact, tiktok's chinese owners have been advised to divest their stake in the US arm of tiktok so it can continue to operate in the US and you can enjoy tiktok.
The choice if it comes down to it is made by tiktok's chinese owners refusing divest their stakes with fair compensation (even above market some would say)
> In an open society, people are free to use apps regardless of who may or may not be behind them. That's the price of freedom: bad actors, unpleasant words, unpopular views, and the freedom to be a jerk.
No, free does not meen freedom to harm or harass others or as you probably know "yell fire in a crowd". There are no protections against malicious and provable intent in any society, free or not. It could be a speech or even your thought, if it can be proven that your intent was malice then you acted in abuse of the liberites granted to you and forfeited their protections. Moreover, you cannot argue that an act against a company (not a person with rights) is an act against its users without proving that the government was intending to restrict or harm the company's users.
In a free society, you do not have the freedom to access tiktok, you have the freedom to become tiktok or use many of the alternate competing services.
Companies are denied license to operate in the US all the time, a free society is free for people not random foreign corporations.
Corporations are not people.
You have unequal trade - china gives you stuff for free, to your benefit. It's nice that you're worried about the Chinese consumer getting to benefit from access to US social media, but the benefit of that access is to the Chinese customer
Pushing a China-centric view on the populace and allowing the option for data gathering to influence TikTok rewards, can end up with a political outcome at the ballot box.
Facebook did sway votes in the 2010s. Let's not emulate China's authoritarian state policies and close the option for that to happen.
Laying the groundwork now to keep westerners separate from the social credit system, will likely be useful to prevent behavioural capture of economic activity.
Twitter was blocked because the American embassy was tweeting accurate air quality numbers which was embarrassing the Chinese government (who up until that time refused to acknowledge that the air quality was really bad). Or so we all thought at the time.
I don't see a really good reason to ban tiktok in the USA, first we don't really ban things nor have the infrastructure for it. The best we can do is pollute some DNS records maybe, or maybe we can buy GFW technology from China to accomplish this? Second...tiktok is used mostly by teens, who will be all over anything that is officially banned by old people. We would just be making tiktok really popular, and there is no good infosec reason to do that.
This is an enemy foreign government collecting information on US citizens.
If the answer is yes then by all means, but I think it makes for atrocious foreign policy relations.
The US has refused to consider similar legislation but that would be a way to keep TikTok and limit data collection on US citizens and require it stay in the USA.
Western Europe and US are generally wanting each other to succeed as friends and allies.
China wants the us market but also wants the US to be weaker and not pose an example as a democracy.
It also assumes a lot about level government control in each country that is highly dissimilar.
seems like the characterization is doing all the work for you
One of the CCP's goal is to destabilize the Western Liberal order. This is, of course, bad for the West. It's not unreasonable to take actions to prevent this.
We know how dangerous TikTok is in their hands because we know how valuable Facebook, Google etc is in ours.
The EU for example fines US tech companies left and right and enforced EU data privacy law and US companies pay up or comply. The dispute with China and US tech companies was never about privacy but about censorship (censoring what the state tells you to), there is no such dispute between tiktok and the US gov.
We really need a term for silly people that jealous-hate the US lol
Somebody didn't listen to Edward Snowden..
If you care more about the values, it makes no sense to drop the values to retain the power
Outside the US there are a lot of envious people that scream hypocrisy and act anti-US at every opportunity so what you're saying isn't surprising. Americans shouldn't care what "the world" thinks when it comes to trade policy.
Personally I couldn't care less if the US is like or not like China. Xi's regime is very anti-us and any state controlled companies can get bent.
The nerve on some people. They want you to apologize for banning a service controlled by the CCP which is talking about actual war against the US.
It is not necessarily hypocrisy. I haven't paid too much attention, but does the US say China banning Facebook or Google is anti free speech?
If not, then the US is not being hypocritical. Perhaps, double standards or something like that is more of what you were looking for?
>Ban it by all means, but you will become just like China
China builds roads. If the US builds roads it will become just like China.
>a state that censors information and speech from its citizens because the government is scared of it.
You think Europe is doing this when they banned RT, right?
There are several legit arguments against banning, but this isn't one one of them. Banning Tiktok is not censoring information and speech, let alone doing it because of fear. If it were, then they'd also ban all of the numerous other methods by which people can talk to each other.
I just don't think those two are the same.