News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U... by quotemstr on Saturday August 01, 2020 @06:04PM (#24024276)
The problem here isn't TikTok being banned. I couldn't care less about TikTok. The problem here is singling out an individual entity for punishment outside an established framework of laws just because we don't like it. You can be tough on China without becoming China.

Nobody is suggesting that China's trade policy go unchallenged. What I do want is a policy including evidence, recourse, and the possibility of compliance. I have seen no explanation whatsoever of why TikTok is so urgently terrible that we can't deal with whatever it is that the company is doing using rules --- and this strange silence is coming from people ordinarily keen on that old "government of laws, not men" principle. Everything is weird these days.

Re:TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U... by realusername on Saturday August 01, 2020 @10:29PM (#24025831)
> The problem here isn't TikTok being banned. I couldn't care less about TikTok. The problem here is singling out an individual entity for punishment outside an established framework of laws just because we don't like it. You can be tough on China without becoming China.

Even without talking about morality or Chinese laws, TikTok could just be banned as trade retaliation. It's very common outside of tech, if a country closes down their market, they generally face retaliation on their foreign markets.

But yes I do agree with you on that, it should be done using an official retaliation policy, not just tweeted by the US president...

Re:TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U... by mike00632 on Monday August 03, 2020 @01:54AM (#24034602)
Trade retaliation is generally executed on commodities that are already unfairly subsidized by the opposing nation. I'm thinking of disputes over tires, steel, pork, beef, corn. Banning a service company that seems to have done nothing wrong as a means of tit-for-tat retaliation is different.
Re:TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U... by hhsuey on Saturday August 01, 2020 @07:26PM (#24024821)
> You can be tough on China without becoming China.

Honest question. Do you know how this could be done? I'm not too familiar with foreign affairs.

Re:TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U... by faizanbhat on Saturday August 01, 2020 @10:34PM (#24025862)
The U.S. has many tactics at its disposal:

1. Sanctioning bad actors: Placing wide ranging economic sanctions on bad actors is a potent tool but it can backfire. U.S can penalize any company that does business with sanctioned individuals. In the case of China, applying sanctions on party members would make it virtually impossible for them to transfer their wealth overseas via global banks, property markets, investment vehicles, etc. This ratchets up the pressure on the Chinese government as it immediately and adversely affects the interests of China’s powerful elite. The downside of this approach is that China is likely to retaliate against U.S. economic interests within China. It’s a large market coveted by many U.S. companies, so there is likely to be political blowback, which makes this unlikely to happen.

2. Diplomatic pressure to isolate China: China cares deeply about how it’s perceived on the world stage. We rarely hear strong international condemnation of China’s social, political or economic policies. This is partly due to the China’s success in using their economic power to strengthen their global standing. Much has been written about China’s debt diplomacy, for example. China now plays an outsized role in organizations like the WHO and various UN bodies. It’s even a member of the UN human rights council. The U.S. on the other hand has been withdrawing from these bodies, effectively ceding the stage to China. The U.S could apply pressure on China by once again assuming its leadership position within these bodies, and working with allies to counter Chinese influence and condemn China’s internal and external policies. China has no effective response to this tactic and it’s therefore one that they are particularly concerned about IMO.

3. Stronger military and economic alliances with Taiwan, India, Japan and Australia would create a counter balance to rising Chinese dominance in the region.

4. The U.S can also take steps to prevent knowledge transfer to China by limiting foreign student intake, or preventing research collaboration with Chinese universities.

Re:TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U... by elisharobinson on Sunday August 02, 2020 @10:51AM (#24029047)
these dont have any standard precedent for application in terms of tech and tech related fields , where geographic boundaries do not apply. china has had a free ride now i guess it has to pay , also the same could be said about china banning free speech and tech companies from other countries , i guess you will have no problem with that.
Re:TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U... by elSidCampeador on Saturday August 01, 2020 @09:54PM (#24025655)
> You can be tough on China without becoming China.

Sovereign nations have always reserved the right to decide what is allowed on their shores. That they disallow an entity from operating on their shores does not mean that they have "become China".

Re:TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U... by ClumsyPilot on Saturday August 01, 2020 @11:36PM (#24026130)
You are conflating rule of law and sovereignty.
Re:TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U... by benchen70 on Sunday August 02, 2020 @03:35AM (#24027061)
China can do whatever it wants, US can do whatever it wants. Whatever a country wants to do has nothing to do with how it governed, law or not. Law is a set of communally mutually agreed upon rules, so a society can function. However, the key is the word "communal", as in - which community is agreeing upon this law. China can complain that the new laws in the US is illegitimate, but the laws are made by Americans for Americans. Of course the law is not going to extend outside US, for example, they do not dictate what some Canadian company operating in Canada can do. But, in the US, these laws are there for Americans, for American soil, under the territory that the US government formally rules over. Of course, the US makes these rules, because it is its sovereign right to do so. China has no authority over how or why this law is made. Just like the US has no authority to say how Chinese government creates laws.

But then again, China likes to say “Do not interfere in our internal matters”; the US can say the same thing.

Re:TikTok’s Chinese owner offers to forego stake to clinch U... by elSidCampeador on Sunday August 02, 2020 @10:03PM (#24033494)
The rule of law exists because of a country's sovereignty. Sometimes, the two must be conflated.