The point of parent’s comment is calling this oppression of speech is incorrect, and I’d agree. Does that make this any less of a bad thing? In my mind, no! But lets argue for or against it on genuine terms.
Even the media type being blocked still has (albeit worse) alternatives; instagram, youtube, snapchat, and probably others have a similar format that could still be used. So it’s not really preventing us from using the “short clip” format for speech in general.
Maybe I’m just old. But it feels disingenuous to call it an affront to freedom of speech. TO BE CLEAR, it’s not GOOD, and I don’t think it should HAPPEN. But it’s just weird to see the meaning of words shift before my eyes.
I can understand not liking that, but it has nothing to do with free speech. This is regulating commerce.
> There's no real way to bring a "TikTok" ban into effect that doesn't constitute a massive increase of power the executive
TikTok is a company with a balance sheet to protect. They'll pull their app when told to avoid the US government taking their money. Apple and Google will also pull it from the app store. There's nothing new here.
The executive is unilaterally deciding users cannot have an app on their phone, and that as a US citizen I cannot access APIs in another country simply because the executive has declared it.
For me it is all about how this is implemented and there is no way I can see this not being implemented in a way that serves as a vast expansion of government powers.
Do they shut tikTok out of DNS?
Do they tell people they aren't allowed to install the app?
Do they tell google and apple they aren't allowed to have the app in the app star?
Do they block their IPs from being routed in the US?
There's no real way to bring a "TikTok" ban into effect that doesn't constitute a massive increase of power the executive has to regulate the internet.
On the flip side I 100% think we need to figure out how to get TikTok out of here as it is 100% a tool by the CCP. So I am conflicted and confused.