Hacker News Reader

Comment by LeroyRaz | Hacker News Reader

Tiktok is obviously a massive national security risk, and I find it funny people don't see that.

It is extremely well established that propaganda has great value, and so allowing a foreign adversary the capacity to potentially control the information your citizens receive in a clandestine way is insanely dangerous.

View on HN

Yes, we should also forbid books published by Chinese publishing companies because the CPC might pressure those companies to put propaganda in the books.

We should also forbid Hollywood from selling movies in China, because as we've already seen that means the movies are being adjusted to get approval in China.

We should also forbid Chinese citizens talking to Americans, because they might convince Americans on a topic we don't can't allow American minds to be changed about.

The first two don't apply because they don't share the hyper personalized nature of social media. No two people see the same thing so it's impossible to react to foreign propaganda. Books and movies don't work that way.

Third example is irrelevant because it's impossible to achieve the efficiency (reach) that social media has.

I don't really see your point. Tiktok is a video library. With the exception of private videos, anything hosted on the app can be viewed by anyone. Whether or not the app provides a personalized algorithmic selection of videos does not have any bearing on the more fundamental question of whether American's have the right to access foreign media.

Of course it's relevant. TikTok should be considered a broadcaster. We have not allowed foreign ownership of a broadcaster since 1934.

A book does not broadcast in the same way.

Since when are social media apps considered broadcasters? In fact, section 230 legally protects social media apps from the civil liabilities of broadcasting. You're also just distracting from the actual issue. Being that, as citizens of a democratic republic promoting free speech, press, association, etc., do you think we have a right to view foreign media (including broadcasts for that matter)?

Yes we should be able to view it. This restriction doesn't prevent us from viewing these creators or their videos. It DOES mandate that it is sold to a US-based company.

Allowing a foreign adversary to consistently pump in propaganda just isn't something that should be protected by free speech... You, a citizen, are allowed to go find whatever media your heart desires. A foreign power is NOT allowed to force feed your propaganda. How is that not clear?

Free speech protects our ability to not be prosecuted for saying or viewing something controversial. Why on earth would that same protection be extended to a foreign power?!

> TikTok should be considered a broadcaster.

> Since when are social media apps considered broadcasters?

Not OP but they said should be, not is

We live in a democracy. If you get enough people to vote for this platform, then sure let's do it.

You can't compare a popular bipartisan law to a hypothetical thing you just made up.

Peoples' votes matter

I didn't seen any election in which this was on the table. This issue is popular and bipartisan amongst congresspeople, but that cannot be extrapolated to the public.

Moreover when there's 100s of issues at stake in any election you will inevitably have to vote for a candidate that disagrees with you on some of them.

Moreover the entire point of "rights" like free speech is that some things need to be protected beyond a simple majority.

The popular vote for president would like a word. And, yes, I know Trump won that too, but the point still stands that it doesn't matter.

> It is extremely well established that propaganda has great value, and so allowing a foreign adversary the capacity to potentially control the information your citizens receive in a clandestine way is insanely dangerous.

I would say that allowing a ~foreign adversary~ anyone the capacity to potentially control the information your citizens receive in a clandestine way is insanely dangerous. Why do we let domestic ones do it? We're seeing what they're doing to our societies.

It would have been farcically easy to legislate that any large social media company have to expose their algorithm to a regulator, with a capacity for spot checks and immense sanctions if they fail to comply.

If your argument is "we can't allow any foreign owned social media to operate in the US", then how can you possible argue that the rest of the world should allow American applications?

>If your argument is "we can't allow any foreign owned social media to operate in the US", then how can you possible argue that the rest of the world should allow American applications?

Are they not free to ban it if they wish? But they won't because contrary to what some people would like to push, the CCP in fact is alot more sinister than the US Government, and foreigners do recognize that in genuine security analysis.

Reddit is the exact same - just a propaganda machine

I disagree. While I think there are definitely biases on Reddit, there is a difference between users, individual moderators, or even established sub policies having a political leaning versus an algorithmically masked propaganda machine like TikTok.

Call me old fashion, but I put more faith in a profit seeking US company (recently public) with light government oversight than a foreign owned black box.

You might be missing the fact that there is a significant amount of bots on Reddit pushing certain agendas giving the impression they're foreign sponsored.

you may be right that there is a, "significant amount of bots on Reddit pushing certain agendas". However, Reddit is fundamentally designed to incentivize authentic engagement and to punish bots. If it wasn't the case before is certainly is now given the fact that they are now extracting value from the authenticity of data on their platform via AI Training data sales. Reddit is fiduciarily encouraged to tamp down bots and spam because they are financially incentivized to have the most genuine data.

All of that aside it is irrelevant because we are talking about third parties (users/bots) pushing propaganda vs the platform owner itself pushing propaganda.

I'd vouch for fake-ness of political Reddit as well

it's easier to see phrasing and logical inconsistencies when you don't share the opinion that gets forced, sadly

You disagree - try this. Go to the "popular" feed and take a scroll.

I compel you to find one single positive post about capitalism or the west. Count the number of anti-capitalist or blatant pro-ccp content posts.

One such - "Luigis game is about to be multiplayer" (reference to the recent murder of the insurance company ceo) with a video with the label "y'all look how the chinese are living" (compared to usa)

You also say you put faith in a profit seeking US company. Reddit is not a USA owned company.

Can you provide examples of China controlled propaganda happening on Tiktok?

Things that are factually true don't count, obviously.

Can you, someone, anyone in this toxic wasteland of a thread please point out what propaganda you're talking about? Point to an actual thing that justifies banning something 140M Americans use daily and don't just expound upon your vague national security paranoia.

Why does the ban need to be reactive for you to understand it?

"Where are the examples" is a straw man. Imagine the ways a political enemy might exploit limitless access to the attention of 140M Americans. The calculus seems to be that a false negative will be much more catastrophic than a false positive.

I understand what you're saying but that argument I don't think should apply here. Having some kind of evidence to back up a drastic action like this is not something that should be argued for, it should be a given. I've asked at least 5 different times for people to point to anything material, and no one has come up with anything. I'm not saying there is no threat, I could be wrong and there could be a massive threat, but if there is one shouldn't we be able to point to something more than "it could happen" and being paranoid about it? I'm being asked to have faith in institutions/politicians that have a long, long, long proven track record of not having my best interests at heart and I can't accept that when they have clear conflicting interests / motives.

I think the American government is contorting its public argument to avoid saying this plainly because there are many American companies that control information for most of the world, and they don't want other countries to go "Hmm, hang on a minute..."

National security risk to which nation? The kids on TikTok seem to understand pretty well why it all the sudden was wrongthink.

They do see it, they just support that very foreign adversary (or may even be such adversaries).

"The internet is obviously a massive national security risk, and I find it funny people don't see that"

"Libraries are obviously a massive national security risk, and I find it funny people don't see that."

the problem is that similar efforts in other countries have been criticized as "internet censorship"

either Russia and Indonesia are in the right - or US is in the wrong

Allowing the government to control the information its citizens receive is dangerous.

What do you mean national security risk? What risk to whom, exactly? Do you mean that the algorithm can portray communism or China in a positive light? Can you provide an example video that constitutes this threat?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com