TikTok is taking the US government to court.

          • @TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -37 months ago

            If this were true, it wouldn’t matter that the US set up the social security number system, because Experian leaked millions of Americans’ SSNs.

            It obviously matters who owns a service that millions of citizens use from a country that is a political rival. You’re just hoping to shut down any conversation against TikTok with a whataboutism

            • @DrDeadCrash@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              97 months ago

              We’re talking about individuals’ personal data stored by social media companies being accessible to others (governments, in this case). This has nothing to do with social security.

              The problem is that the data is accessable, but that’s not being addressed. This is an improper fix to an actual problem, just facts.

              • @tborders@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                47 months ago

                When signing up for a tik-tok account, I put in a birth date, a username, an email address for verifcation and that was it. I didn’t need to provide a drivers license, verify that the name I put in was my actual name, that the birth date was my actual birth date. Location isn’t allowed nor was it requested and neither was Nearby devices. It’s actually been a much better behaved application than any American social media app.

                • @DrDeadCrash@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  47 months ago

                  It’s a bad analogy. Mass surveillance (continuous collection of everyone’s data) has very little to do with the number we use to track social security payments.

                  • @TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    -37 months ago

                    The ownership part was how it was analogous. That was pretty obvious. Any time a massive system is set up for millions of people to use, it quite obviously matters who set it up and why.

                    I just love when Internet randos pretend not to get analogies because I’m, gasp, comparing things which aren’t identical.

                    In any case, sorry to interrupt your stream of 15 second video clips.

          • @FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -57 months ago

            So Americans having access to American’s Data is bad but you think China having access to American’s Data is good?

              • @FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -47 months ago

                Alright, thank you for clarifying that you want more restrictions and laws against these companies, it just seemed odd for you to bring up those other businesses in a post talking about the TikTok forced sale and resulting lawsuit.

                I’m just happy about them restricting US Citizen data being brokered to adversarial nations including Iran, Russia, China, and others.

                • @DrDeadCrash@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  27 months ago

                  I want the issue of mass surveillance / data collection to be addressed, instead of this bs which is basically working around the edges the problem. Tick-tock shouldn’t be allowed to sell (/provide) user data to anyone but neither should Meta, X, reddit, etc.

                  • @FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    -47 months ago

                    So you’re simultaneously against the TikTok ban but also worried about the lack of privacy for American Citizens?

          • @TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -27 months ago

            “if one authoritarian government does surveillance even across borders, why can’t all? Anything less than ‘i agree’ here is hypocrisy!”

            • @PumpkinSkink@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              107 months ago

              Noone is saying that. The argument is pretty much that people want more scrutiny applied to other companies beyond tiktok, and ideally not be under constant surveillance by any of them, not that people want to be monitored by all police states equally.

              • @TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -47 months ago

                It’s a whataboutist cop out. People who like tiktok just wanna point out how supposedly since tiktok was targeted, then it’s all in bad faith and therefore there could never possibly be a legit concern with tiktok in particular. Any argument to be addressed with “ChInA bAd”

        • @dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          27 months ago

          It doesn’t matter who owns it. It’s the data that the US government is accessing.

          I couldn’t give a shit about TikTok, I’ve never used it in my life. I just think the US should be open and say we are banning this as we don’t have control over it. Sure China is only doing what we are doing but fuck em. I’d respect that.

          Also, it’s got to be about silencing pro-Palestinian rhetoric too.

          If they ban TikTok they should ban FaceBook and Instagram too.

      • @atrielienz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        67 months ago

        I have a question for you. What is the difference between Google being banned in China and Tik Tok being banned in the US?

    • @trolololol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      207 months ago

      Can I ban NSA from spying on me? I’m not even on fReEeDoOoOoM land, I should be entitled to some amount of privacy

        • just another dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          137 months ago

          This is not whataboutism - it’s looking at the bigger picture. The point is that you should want to prevent all mass surveillance by social media companies. Not force them to sell so that the government can get its greedy paws on the data.

          • @UnpluggedFridge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            17 months ago

            The government can already access the data with a warrant. The ownership of TikTok has literally 0 effect on the government’s ability to access user data. Not being owned by the Chinese government has a huge impact on China’s ability to access that data.

    • TimeSquirrel
      link
      fedilink
      -3
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      And if someone chooses to watch that, that’s their business. Not nanny government’s. Not saying I do. But none of us have any business telling someone else what they can and cannot watch. That’s part of living in a supposedly “free” country. We aren’t China. You want a “great firewall”, then move there.

      In our zeal to shun everything China-related, we must not become them.

      • @TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        07 months ago

        Yes I need my government to tell me obvious facts like foreign surveillance is bad. I’m just that stupid /s

    • Possibly linux
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -167 months ago

      Which is any different than YouTube, Lemmy or anything else?

      I think people should have a right to shoot themselves in the foot if they choose.

      • ben
        link
        fedilink
        English
        137 months ago

        The difference from the perspective of the US is that it’s spyware from a potentially malicious foreign state. China bans US tech companies as well, TikTok took advantage of the US having a much more open market and the state decided that they were acting in bad faith.