"TikTok wasn’t a one-off case. Today, India has banned over 500 Chinese apps to date." [1]
If ByteDance won't sell, let them shutdown. It is truly baffling to me that anyone would defend a company's right to operate freely in the U.S. when it is controlled by a brutal autocracy that is also an emerging adversary.
[1] https://apnews.com/article/india-tiktok-ban-us-china-9ae5223...
So it was a toothless ban. By contrast, US wanted to have their cake and eat it too - keep TikTok and gain complete control over it. And while I know basically nothing about Indian law I'm fairly certain they have a much better legal argument in the US as well. So I don't think the situations have much in common.
[1] - https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=IN&q=H...
They are a self described democratic dictatorship with a system that openly and voluntarily chooses to sacrifice individual liberty and freedom for what they see as the collective good. That is their right as a sovereign power, but it is not a system I would like to live under. And any movement in this sort of direction is something that I think should be actively opposed.
[1] - http://www.npc.gov.cn/zgrdw/englishnpc/Constitution/node_282...
I think this system is pretty nice in lots of ways because it lets local representatives focus on local things, while high level representatives can focus on broad national interests. It also means peoples votes are always extremely important and you're going to be quite 'close' (literally and figuratively) to your representative. Of course the obvious downside is that in China you don't even get to directly vote for the President, but on the other hand - that is similar to many parliamentary systems used throughout Europe. Anyhow, it's an interesting system! Our first past the post district based system is completely broken and dysfunctional, but the people most benefited from it are the only ones who could fix it, so it's not going anywhere anytime soon. But it's fun to at least consider alternatives!
Technically, freedom of speech, religion, press is guaranteed in the Chinese constitution. But China is not a rule of law country so these rights are not enforced in any manner beyond how the government sees fit.
The ban just doesn't apply to end users, but also to advertisers and content producers in the USA. That would have some impact, what is the point of distributing your app if you can't make any money on it.
> By contrast, US wanted to have their cake and eat it too - keep TikTok and gain complete control over it.
The law just specifies that it can't be owned by Chinese. A german company could buy it instead.
> And while I know basically nothing about Indian law I'm fairly certain they have a much better legal argument in the US as well.
That is making a lot of assumptions (I don't why they banned it, but I'm sure their reason must be better than the USA's...because they are India and the USA is worse?).
If the problem with TikTok is data collection, we should legislate bounds on all data collection and make everyone safer. If the problem with TikTok is addictive algorithmic feeds, we should legislate limits on those for all platforms and probably improve everyone's life.
maybe i would think differently if it wasnt banned everywhere else. and china didnt ban every western tech company.
isis recruitment apps, wholesale fent stright from china apps. whatever its my right! going against something blindly just because you want the freedom to do it whether or not you will is odd no? shouldnt you use context.