News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Supreme Court rules to uphold TikTok ban, setting stage for shutdown. Parent comment

Re:Supreme Court rules to uphold TikTok ban, setting stage f... by JumpCrisscross on Friday January 17, 2025 @12:27PM (#42740783)
> bans done for political purposes

You want a political body to make decisions apolitically?

> mental health angle of support

This was de minimis. The support was start to finish from national security angles. There was some cherry-on-top AIPAC and protectionist talk. But the votes were got because TikTok kept lying about serious stuff [1] while Russia reminded the world of the cost of appeasement.

[1] https://www.blackburn.senate.gov/services/files/76E769A8-3ED...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Supreme Court rules to uphold TikTok ban, setting stage f... by wahnfrieden on Friday January 17, 2025 @12:36PM (#42740925)
I know the state didn't do it or say they did it for mental health purposes, I'm responding to the reasons given here for supporting these regulations

BTW you're the one who cast doubt on me for suggesting UnitedHealth is incentivized to raise prices to get around profit caps, which turned out to be exactly the case despite your sense-making of the rules in place: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42716428

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Supreme Court rules to uphold TikTok ban, setting stage f... by JumpCrisscross on Friday January 17, 2025 @01:01PM (#42741260)
> you're the one who cast doubt on me for suggesting UnitedHealth is incentivized to raise prices to get around profit caps, which turned out to be exactly the case despite your sense-making of the rules in place

Sorry, could you link to my comment?

[ Parent | on HN ]