"The US government collects taxes on US citizens, why not let China collect taxes on US citizens? Its the same."
"The US government throws US citizens in jail, why not let Chine throw US citizens in jail? Its the same."
Yeah, it would be great if the Federal government turned down their surveillance. That doesn't make it okay for China to run psy-ops against us.
(and obviously if you're a US national in China you'll pay Chinese and US taxes, because of the weird extraterritorial taxation of the US)
Downloading and using TikTok is a personal choice and you’ve allowed it by doing so as an individual. I don’t think we should ban individual apps from other countries. If we want that, we need some larger more thoughtful policy. But to do so effectively, we essentially need to put up a firewall and ban the sharing of domestically collected data as well (amongst other things, like enforcing these bans.)
PSY-ops as mentioned sounds negative but I’d argue it’s what TikTok and social media consumers enjoy the most.
Not if it interferes with security of the country.
The same personal choice argument is what folks use to justify other choices that are bad (refusing well test vaccines, not paying taxes, etc.)
Banning one app at a time is not the way.
> Banning one app at a time is not the way.
True, let us ban *all* apps from countries that (1) ban US apps and (2) seek to influence US citizens.
My view is the "app" is just a client for information sharing. It would be like putting up a firewall or banning traffic from certain TLD's. Seems ironic that the solution is to mimic the problem.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/06/30/chinese-communist-party...
Back to topic:
Applying critical thinking, you can be patriotic and a critical thinker.
Its not just about being "fine" with one surveiling you and not the other.
It seems to always start from blanket statements or false dichotomies where "if your country does X why are you not ok with C country doing X?" and completely ignoring the nuances in between.
Contrarianism runs rampant on HN and is easily weaponized by bad actors.
(thread locked after 1,397,957 comments)
A course of action so blatantly legal that a Supreme Court Justice used it as an example for what is clearly allowed, dislikeable though it may be.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_t...
Tiktok is not China, Tiktok is owned by a private company
All the arguments that you are using can be successful leveraged against any Inqtel funded private company (of which there are plenty), so I'd recommend you to speak in a measured way
The problem here being this time they can't insert themselves into the surveillance pipeline.
They're not better or worse (unless you're fine with your own Govt surveilling you but not another state), just not the status quo.