Hacker News Reader

Comment by jjcon | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

Mmmm, I don't buy that.

The EFF's old (March 16) take is also negative but more modest, but I am not sure if they had access to the full text: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/03/government-hasnt-justi...

To be fair, the presence of genuine criticism doesn't exclude the possibility of astroturfing. That's sort of the whole point of astroturfing, to attempt to blend in with the grassroots.

You know what the supreme irony is? The China scare (“oh no, totalitarians are coming for us”) is pure manufacturing of consent and its goal is to pass bills that will REDUCE democracy in America.

Both can be true: the China scare is real and lawmakers are trying to pass democracy-eroding bills.

Sure, but in my experience US lawmakers act much more hostile towards me as a US citizen than China ever has or will.

I'm not sure how that's related. For what it's worth, my experience has been the opposite.

Without wanting you to reveal personal details, care to tell us how ?

It’s more of an excuse for the US lawmakers. There’s no need for new legislation to restrict trade with a foreign company.

It's always projection with these people.

Are you saying Joseph Cox from Vice has been paid to be critical of the act? EFF and ACLU also came out against this, have they been paid too?

Add Louis Rossman to the list. He has couple of good videos on the subject.

With the number of people being accused of being commies, it's beginning to feel like the "good old days" of the John Birch society.

No, that isn't what astroturfing typically implies. Astroturfing is spreading FUD and misinformation in more automatable or massive ways, which in turn will cause articles to be written that echo these misinterpretations or misinformation.

EFF and ACLU don't exactly have much credibility left in my book, but that is a personal opinion. EFF is still defending Internet Archive in the pirated books scheme. ACLU has retreated from the USA first amendment, which was their main organizational principle. Not exactly a moral high ground anymore.

https://www.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/20180621ACLU....

https://www.eff.org/cases/hachette-v-internet-archive

The FUD here is the overhyped risk of TikTok. Facebook didn't flip the election in 2016, and TikTok can't brainwash you in 2023. TikTok didn't read your mail, steal your bank account, listen to your calls. If it did, let's get Tim Cook to testify about exactly how it happened (it didn't happen).

Media can brain wash you…

Everyone who thinks maybe it doesn't have real effects on society has missed to the last 10 or so years.

Even if you aren't, you're some superhuman apparently, you live in a society with millions of people who will very much fall over and will very much end up opposing the future of your country.

Look at healthy misinformation machines managed to turn the republicans from incredibly anti-Russia literally saying they are the biggest threat in the world a couple of election cycles ago, to the party with people calling for us to just hand Ukraine to them

China was implicated not too long ago with meddling in Canada's elections. They are absolutely going to use this advantage on us.

Describing IA as a "pirated books scheme" and the ACLU's case selection guidelines as "retreating from the first amendment" is some pretty heavily weighted language that... I dare say sort of feels like misinformation or misinterpretation. I'm personally not even a big fan of the ACLU but you're really taking an inch and turning it into a mile here which feels kind of unnecessary.

They're not describing IA itself as a "pirated books scheme", they are describing IA's online book lending program for books they didn't have as a "pirated books scheme".

And the ACLU has recently voted to stop protecting the 1st Ammendment rights of those expressing certain hostile opinions relatively recently, so I think that description is quite apt as well.

Not to speak of the mountain of good from both organizations. I dont think the EFF has ever said something I disagree with.

Neither of these are just my personal hot takes. EFF and IA are far and away on the wrong side of the law here regardless of jurisdiction or interpretation. You can't say that is just my personal "misinformation" when they were just ruled against by a US district judge on the merits of the case:

https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-judge-rules-internet-archiv...

Former board member of ACLU on the current ACLU:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-aclu-retreats-from-free-exp...

Regarding EEF and IA you seem to be conflating law and morality.

The law is informed by human morality, they both retreated from upholding the law and in my opinion they lose the moral high ground simultaneously. That isn’t conflating, that’s stating what they did legally and then also stating my moral opinion on the matter

> Joseph Cox from Vice has been paid to be critical of the act

Astroturfing isn’t the right term. Group think seems more appropriate. Cox is writing what will get clicks. (Note that zero lawyers are quoted.) This happens on both sides in any political debate, and of course vested interests, including foreign interests, will throw gasoline on the process. (The EFF and ACLU’s have more merit.)

Do you mean group think or polarisation of the debate?

This exactly is something that I fear...if state level actors had free access to our data and potentially a machine to shape public opinion, we can't expect them to give up at the first sign of resistance. The balance between privacy and security is hard, but it's also necessary here.

You are free not to use TikTok, and free to remove the app from your child's phone (if you have kids), but don't use the Government to tell me I can't use TikTok. This is such hyped up nonsense. We live in such a clown world we are going to end up in a world war over a lip sync app.

I'm also free not to smoke, but they still banned smoking and most indoor regions because it can be harm to other people.

So can the widespread use of a propaganda platform like tick tock

Are you now talking about the US politicians or the CCP ones?

I would hope both. Why do you think there was and remains so much pushback around GDPR. The attitude of Americans towards that legislation is telling.

Where can I sign up to receive my pay?

Alternatively, I'd be willing to shill for George Soros, too, if there's enough money in it.

Yep!

There is Astroturfing going on, but I don't know what direction it's going in. There's two separate bills going on[1], and it seems like the worst creatures in Washington are using TikTok as an excuse to severely expand the surveillance state in the bill that's getting all the press, under the guise of "banning TikTok".

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35363410

Reply on news.ycombinator.com