>That happened in 2012, the only legal challenge to CFIUS since it was established in 1975, when Chinese-based Sany Group’s affiliate Ralls Corp. bought wind farms in Oregon. Then- President Barack Obama ordered Ralls to not only divest the wind farms, but also forced it to remove items added to the facilities, including concrete foundation, and barred employee access to the premises. Sany complied.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-tiktok-trump-breaking...

The government frequently bans foreign products that have national security implications.

The ban of an app like TikTok is absolutely unprecedented and is very atypical. This isn't par-for-the-course behavior by the US government, and the outcome of this ban will set a precedent for other apps the US bans on "national security" grounds.

The most recent example was Grindr which was first sold to Chinese company and the government had to force them to sell it back because the app contained location info of potentially sensitive military personnel.

Didn't they ban the use of Huawei in all telecommunication infrastructure a few months ago?

TikTok is not a national security threat. That’s ridiculous.

Better argument for it than for Canadian aluminum.

How come? Clearly the app is used by the youth. Having gullible youth using the app of a country that's knows for its in-app propaganda is very clearly a national security risk.

In-app propaganda? What the hell are you talking about? Have you even used the app?

It is a slippery slope from watching your friends do a silly dance to becoming a communist.

I guess. I don't know.

Genuinely curious about examples of in-app propaganda as related to Tik Tok.

I don't know that the US version has any. But there is a risk that algorithms get tuned to influence youth imo. I think all youth-oriented products have this problem, but China is a riskier actor in that regard.

There are a few video when you type "tiktok propaganda" on youtube. Not sure since I haven't used the app.

What are the national security concerns for these apps that are not present in the multitude of other apps such as WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, Skype, Zoom, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, Google, Gmail, iMessage, Facetime, Vine, Snapchat, YouTube, etc?

What about the suspicions that Trump is upset that TikTok users helped sabotage one of his big rallies and this is retaliation and thus an overextension of his powers and an exercise in authoritarianism (something he's already done many times anyway)?

> What are the national security concerns for these apps that are not present in the multitude of other apps such as WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger, Skype, Zoom, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, Google, Gmail, iMessage, Facetime, Vine, Snapchat, YouTube, etc?

These are all American companies. Wechat and TikTok are controlled by Chinese companies.

> What about the suspicions that Trump is upset that TikTok users helped sabotage one of his big rallies and this is retaliation and thus an overextension of his powers and an exercise in authoritarianism (something he's already done many times anyway)?

I suspect that was actually his motive, and the national security reasoning is just a pretext. That said, a stopped clock is right twice a day.

It is pathetic to see my fellow Americans giving up freedom for “national security” - as the adage goes, they deserve neither.

This is hardly giving up freedom. It is literally the job of the government to be an interface between America and the rest of the world and it is within their purview to deem chinese companies that can collect data on americans a security risk.

Because many US companies have been at the receiving end of unfair trade practices, copyright theft and blatant IP violations from the mainland. It's good that we are finally doing something about that.

I dunno, it worries me to see popular narratives sinking back into nationalistic perspectives. This entrenches us in the “they did A, so we will respond with B” logic, and from there, it only takes a few “reasonable” exchanges between nations “just looking out for themselves” for us all to end up in a situation nobody wanted.

I agree with you on the overall perspective. But I do think exceptions can and do exist.

This not just a case of “they did A, so we will respond with B”. It's a case of “they did A, B, C, etc. so we are responding with X after 10+ years“. To be fair, successive US administrations across party lines gave CCP a long enough rope.

> “they did A, B, C, etc. so we are responding with X after 10+ years“

It’s the same, reactionary logic, that fails to give first concern for the desired end state. Delaying reactionary measures is what many call patience.

The outcome of this ban has important implications for potential bans in the future that affect apps at odds with administrations. End-to-end apps like Signal come to mind.

Doesn’t this mean that the US is getting closer and closer to a dictatorship?

No it means US has a leader who is finally thinking rationally about China, instead of falling into the greed trap that most other politicians have been stuck in.

In my opinion, if China wants to be a part of the global economy, China must let the globe be part of its own economy. Facebook, Google, Twitter have been systematically forced out of China. Why should we let Chinese social media sites in our countries?

The specific act of banning TikTok seems petty and uncalled for, but we have to start somewhere.

No, we don’t. Trade restrictions on China are restrictions on the freedom of Americans.

I understand that this makes sense from a libertarian perspective, but I believe there are certain exceptions to be made when dealing with authoritarian, abusive, and dangerous regimes.

An example would be nuclear material and technology. US places a lot of restrictions on individuals' rights to trade these materials, but I believe it is necessary.

So not all restrictions on individual rights are incorrect, when it comes to trading with foreigners.

Blocking two companies is not restricting trade with China. It is restricting trade with two companies.

...

sigh

banning Chinese apps is xenophobic, yeah that's great logic.

yes, that’s the dictionary definition.

you’re also ignoring that you’ve proved the rest of the world that investing in US is not as safe as everybody thought so. it may byte you in the near future (i don’t wish that, though).

You are not even American. Please do not act like you understand the political process and it's everyday implications.

This is why you have no other retort other than "XENOPHOBIA!". Grow up.

At least in my social circles, this has been one of the few things trump has done that both dems/conservatives agree with. Why would you be ok with CCP collecting info on US citizens and spreading misinformation to benefit a foreign regime?

People share all kinds of private, exploitable information on social media platforms. And social media is a powerful platform for spreading propaganda. Sorry, it's just too dangerous to let the CCP, who are absolute experts in propaganda, have that much influence in domestic affairs.

Dumbstruck that we wouldn’t allow an adversarial country collect data on all of our citizens locations? And potentially more?

It isn't the country directly collecting and analyzing data. It is a company. Chinese companies are required to share data, but so are U.S. companies.

If we focus on the companies, why is okay that U.S. companies are able to collect nearly arbitrary data on all U.S. citizens and participate in propaganda?

It's easy... Chinese companies that operate internationally are controlled by the CCP.

Where’s your outrage over PRISM, which is magnitudes worse?

What exactly do you think PRISM is? https://www.cnet.com/news/no-evidence-of-nsas-direct-access-...