It strikes me as a fairly straightforward form of "Combating [bad thing] (CCP in this case) actually helps [bad thing]."
It's true you never said CCP should go unopposed. I will concede, since I don't know you, it is possible someone could propose a way to deal with the threat of Tiktok/ CCP that wouldn't result in you once again saying "actually, your proposal to combat CCP would actually help CCP."
Maybe you can help me out. If banning Tiktok would not result in Millennials turning traitor would you support it?
Or are you actually against banning Tiktok for some other undisclosed reason?
Like maybe you think the free market should decide?
Like everyone, Ive many opinions and views. Some of mine are that we're being exploited by China, and our government is failing to advocate for us properly, covering their failures with these trash bills. I've all kinds of ideas of alternatives, to more effectively protect the US.
None of that was part of what I wanted to discuss. My comment was simply that tiktok shouldn't be banned, and I gave one reason why. Full stop. Your imagination is running wild beyond that.
There are many excellent comments and views that I agree with which provide alternatives, for example https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35368537
Consult the others here for more discussion on these things, they're smarter than me and I have no interest in discussing further with you.
"Are there social media moderation laws? No? Then maybe start there."
with no further elaboration on what a "social media moderation law" should entail and how such a "social media moderation law" could effectively offer a solution and your take away was:
1) This was a serious proposal.
and
2) that 47 word post is an "excellent comment" that reflects what it looks like when a smart person attempts to solve a problem.
Nope, you are well aware that he replied to the correct comment. The above reply or yours is really arguing in bad faith.
You must have accidentally replied to the wrong comment.