The way .ml cries everyday about TikTok being banned you’d think it was an actual real life crises for all of you.
Multiple counties have already banned the app (as well as other ccp government apps) years before the US started trying to. Where was all the out cry then?
can’t find any western countries that have it banned for the general public
Afghanistan.
Australia.
Belgium.
Canada.
Denmark.
European Union.
France.
India.
Lativa.
Netherlands.
New Zealand.
Norway.
Pakistan.
Taiwan.
United Kingdom.All have banned the app either from government employees to a nationwide ban.
“You can’t use this at work” and “You can’t use this ever” are very different things.
That’s correct. Not every country on that list limits the ban to just govt employees.
How many apps has China flat out banned? Movies? The actual Internet?
How many apps has China flat out banned? Movies? The actual Internet?
So what you’re saying is that 'murica is just as bad as China
Hardly. Banning one app for security is nowhere near as bad as blocking most of the entire world because you don’t want your citizens to see it.
Are you even remotely aware of the level of spying going on in 'murica, by 'murica?
This is a bit dishonest. Only Afghanistan and India have banned TikTok from citizens and neither of them are western countires. In every other country you listed it’s just about government devices.
.ee users and simping for every lib policy. Name a better combo.
Dune 2 on mushrooms?
Removed by mod
Because it’s not a list of rapists, just a list of people Epstein was interested in having influential control over.
…and even going to the Island just meant he was trying to influence you. He was looking for whatever leverage he could find over people.
The list of rapists certainly exists
Court papers said that alongside photos were compact discs with handwritten labels including: “‘Young [Name] + [Name],’
Agreed. Its a list. Anyone can make a list of people. They can even put people they’ve never met on the list.
I can make a list, put your name on it, label “bad people” and leave it for the FBI to find. Does that prove you’re bad?
For those who have truley committed the crimes suggested by the “list”, I vote for a beheading (not the one attached to the neck).
When was the last time Tik Tok was accused of rape?
Virginia Giuffre: What we know about Prince Andrew’s accuser
If the “protect children” politician does nothing about school shootings, you know they’re a PoS.
This is fucking retarded
It’s because Epstein’s island is a honeypot </tinfoil-hat>
A honeypot trap that’s never used as a trap is just free honey.
Of course the island was a honeypot trap. How else did Epstein create all his compact discs with handwritten labels including: “‘Young [Name] + [Name],’
How is this itself not a fake argument?
The arguments in support of tick-tock are a bizarre amalgamation of just about every category of bad faith argument. I haven’t seen one that suggests tick-tock it’s actually a net benefit.
it’s not that tiktok is good, it’s that banning it sets a bad precedent and will be used to justify further control and censorship of the internet
I’m all for setting a precedent if it’s about banning chinese spyware and propaganda weapons.
That’s a much better argument than what’s presented in this meme. There’s at least an argument to claim that the difference is about curtailing foreign interest through ownership. Ownership does heavily influence a platform. Unfortunately that hasn’t prevented Murdock from owning more formal messaging platforms.
On a side note, how do you feel about a handful of corporations controlling and censoring the Internet?
I may have missed something in civics class, but since when is access to a crappy social media site a right?
Since when is reading newspapers your government doesn’t agree with a right? Since when is communicating with people your government doesn’t like a right? Since when is publishing whatever you want a right? Since approximately 1776. It’s such an important right that it’s literally the first one in the constitution. Because our ability to speak freely and criticize the government is one of the rights that underpins all others. The medium shouldn’t matter, speech is speech whether it’s an app, website, chat server, newspaper, bulletin board, code, painting, drawing, whatever. If the government can just shut down any medium or venue they don’t like because “it’s propaganda”, that basically closes the door to any open criticism of the government.
We’ve tried not having those rights for the sake of convenience, expediency, or social pleasantness. Tends to not end well. Ask people in Russia or Iran how that “government gets to dictate where and how you speak” thing is going for them. Insane bootlicking going on in this thread.
I mean I’m not saying that this is being gone about the right way or for the right reasons, but when an adversarial nation-state is working to undermine US economic interests within its borders is there really anything wrong with punching back? I personally don’t think so, but I’m fully aware that I’m probably in the minority on this here.
https://twitter.com/lizalinwsj/status/1765615508357779477
(paywalled article from author above https://www.wsj.com/world/china/china-technology-software-delete-america-2b8ea89f)
The govt can do anything it wants to punch back so long as it’s not infringing on the rights of its citizens. Our plan to stop China from “influencing us” is to… become more like China?
If China is going prevent US companies from doing profitable business within its economic borders I don’t see why the US should allow Chinese companies to engage in profitable businesses ventures within its country.
Blocking a company from doing business in the US is not the same as the US Government infringing on citizens rights. The better way to do it imo would be to toss ByteDance on the Sanctioned Entities list and block any US financial institution from servicing their US subsidiary. ByteDance wouldn’t stay in the US market for long if they couldn’t get any ad revenue, then it’s their choice to pull out instead of the US Government kicking them out.
It’s really not an infringement of rights either way though.
If China is going prevent US companies from doing profitable business within its economic borders I don’t see why the US should allow Chinese companies to engage in profitable businesses ventures within its country.
- They get to do whatever they want because they’re a dicatorship. Saying the US government should be allowed to do something “because China does it” is a real slippery slope. 2. We aren’t talking about oil extraction or car sales here, we’re talking about something which is explicitly a speech platform. They are different.
It’s not just a “company” being banned, it’s the government telling you that you can’t use that companies services for your speech. Imaging the US government banning the The Guardian because it’s not owned by US citizens. That’s the same thing as banning TikTok because it’s not owned by US Citizens. The government has no right to ban newspapers or websites which are otherwise engaging in legally-protected speech. You have a right to hear what they have to say.
Jesus christ bro you’re insufferable.
They get to do whatever they want because they’re a dicatorship. Saying the US government should be allowed to do something “because China does it” is a real slippery slope.
It’s a weird blend of trade war and cyber warfare, but for all intents and purposes it’s a trade war right now. No one was complaining that the US is blocking the sale of H100s in China are they? No.
We aren’t talking about oil extraction or car sales here, we’re talking about something which is explicitly a speech platform. They are different.
Except it’s not, it’s an ad platform.
It’s not just a “company” being banned, it’s the government telling you that you can’t use that companies services for your speech.
Nope, absolutely incorrect, it is indeed just a company being banned. I don’t think you fully understand what “speech” is, or really who the Constitution applies to. You do realize that the First Amendment means that the government may not jail, fine, or impose civil liability on people or organizations based on what they say or write, right? You also realize that preventing a company from doing business in the US because they’re beholden to an openly antagonistic nation-state is decidedly not the same as banning a company from doing business in the US because of its speech right?
Freedom of speech and the press has literally nothing at all to do with this.
Except it’s not, it’s an ad platform.
Right. So if they sell ads on it, it’s not a speech platform right? Reddit, not a speech platform? The Washington Post? The Guardian? Lemmy, when lemmy instances start running ads, Not a speech platform? Gmail? Not a speech platform?
Nope, absolutely incorrect, it is indeed just a company being banned.
It’s not. This isn’t a company that sells cars, they provide an online speech platform. It’s my ability to use the speech platform that gets banned in the process. They can ban TikTok from being able to “do business” in the US, that is different from pulling it from the app store or installing a great firewall to prevent US citizens from accessing their site. And frankly, “doing business” has been an inherent part of speech platforms for decades, selling advertising on speech platforms is how they can exist, all the way back to the days of newspapers and radio.
That slope is very slippery.
TikTok isn’t your “right”, and if you say that banning tiktok is talking away your rights, TikTok’s taking away people’s lives
Lemmy is mostly children isn’t it
it would be one thing if they were actually going to ban it, but the plan is pretty plainly for deep state establishment to seize it so that the US government can do all the awful things that they’re accusing the Chinese government of doing. Remember y’all, the difference between information and propaganda is “Do I like the person who is currently speaking?” and nothing more.
If it truly was a “free speech platform” the ownership wouldn’t matter either way, right?
swing and a miss
the point is that they’re trying to pretend they’re protecting us from propaganda by seizing the propaganda platform and operating it themselves. you don’t trust the CCP and neither do I. Let’s take that as read. do you trust the US government? if this is dangerous, why not shut it down? hell, why not go a step further and make it illegal for anyone to do?
- Are different, unrelated things
- Involve different parts of government
- Involve different people in charge
- Is smoothbrain understanding of criminal investigations
- Is smoothbrain understanding of due process
I’m starting to fly down some ‘conspiracy hole’ about this shit: I can’t trust or even hope that the avalanche of memes like these aren’t Chinese (or Russian? they love stirring our shit up for the lulz) in origin. This paranoia reinforces itself in a loop
