• Lemminary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Just like the “men would do anything but go to therapy” meme, Americans would rather install malware on their phones than get out to vote.

  • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    3 hours ago

    American gov worried about Americans going to Chinese social media to share even more personal information

    Chinese gov worried about the influx of Americans inside their Great Firewall

    What a clusterfuck. I love it.

  • EvilHaitianEatingYourCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    My gf is Chinese and her feed is littered with Americans trying to look cool, and speaking zero Mandarin. The other one constantly occurring are Americans saying “so what Chinese are getting my data? You know what’s called sharing? It’s called Kindness❤️🙏” i almost spit my coffee, but I was in bed and I had dry mouth

    It’s so wierd to see those people to go out of their way, to another soulless corporation, for no benefit.

  • Gerudo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    I think a handful of influencers found it and just started promoting it. It’s a bandwagon thing, I’m not expecting 95% of the TikTok base to be going to another Chinese app just to stick it to the man. They are going their because the people they follow are going there.

  • LifeOfChance@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Honestly, The government isn’t protecting our data anyways so it really doesn’t matter. Amazon has had yet another massive breach but no worries the government is sitting idly by. Not a single action will be taken even though this happens all the time. No penalty means no reason to change.

    • vulture_god@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Is this the Amazon breach you’re talking about?

      https://www.forbes.com/sites/larsdaniel/2024/11/11/amazon-confirms-data-breach-exposed-2800000-lines-of-employee-data/

      I hadn’t heard of it, and I usually follow this stuff pretty closely. FWIW, in this case, it appears that the data was employee data from a third party vendor’s systems:

      The exposed Amazon dataset includes employee work contact information, email addresses, desk phone numbers, and building locations. While Amazon spokesperson Adam Montgomery confirmed the breach, he emphasized in a statement to TechCrunch that core Amazon and Amazon Web Services, or AWS, systems remained secure.

      People misconfigure AWS resources all the time, so it is definitely true that data stored by Amazon leaks out from time to time, although they don’t have much culpability in these cases.

    • mxcory@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Yeah, if the government really cared, they would be pushing privacy laws instead of trying to ban a platform.

      • lurch (he/him)@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        that platform is being banned because there are very limited privacy laws and the platform doesn’t even comply with those. all theyhad to do is start a US front company with a data center, host all collected user data there and deny all data center access to the foreign parent company.

      • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Yeah…but it’s much easier to get elected with "ChInA bAd!”

        Then “We need a nuanced approach to privacy and social media.”

    • PunnyName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      And it’s understandable. 170 million US citizens are on TikTok. More than 1% has a significant business enterprise that has flourished in that app (not so on the other apps).

      The US government, beyond just violating* the free speech of half the population, would be shooting itself in the face by banning the app, considering how much lost tax revenue is likely to occur.

  • SleepyPie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    13 hours ago

    They really have cut off their nose to spite their face imo. Only way this makes sense to me is that the users want a noble justification for their ignoble habit.

    “The data would’ve ended up in China anyway since American apps would’ve sold it.” -Rationalizations of a feed addict fiending

    • CharmOffensive@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Explain exactly how using a Chinese app will negatively impact the average American. Don’t use vague threats, use evidence based examples. I’ll wait.

      • gmtom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Have you ever been on tiktok? You will lose braincells quicker than drinking gasoline.

        It should genuinely be considered self harm to have a tiktok account.

      • gubblebumbum@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        It allows any pos to spread their garbage misinformed opinions as facts. its full of adult weirdos making softcore porn knowing the platform is full of minors and many intentionally targeting their content towards them. Its full of grifters peddling pseudoscientific supplements, cosmetics, medical advice etc. Its full of rwnj and pseudo progressives from all over the world spreading populist propaganda. It also makes it easy for any anti social pos to get famous.

      • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        China controlling the narrative might be a bit worrying. Not sure how much that reflects in the daily life of a single person but for societies it does have some implications.

        • CharmOffensive@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          It’s no more worrying than the misinformation being spread on Facebook and X, in large part by Russian troll farms or Murdoch’s media empire, but somehow it’s China that’s the real problem. I see no reason why anyone should be fear mongering about the dangers of using a Chinese app any more than using X.

          • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            I mean imo all sort narrative building and interference is worrying and from a government perspective of course foreign actions and platforms are more worrying. China and Russia being very clearly rivals if not outright enemies of the US, it is more worrying because of that.

    • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      How’s it worse for china to have it than American companies. If anything American ones have more access to you to fuck you over. All of them should be banned/heavily regulated for privacy. Not just tiktok.

  • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    15 hours ago

    The government says it’s for our own good and we should trust them.

    Except we don’t trust them and don’t care about our own good.

    • rzlatic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      no. the ban is not against chinese apps, its against tiktok specifically.

      • LengAwaits@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        Not quite. As far as I can tell the US can now play whack-a-mole with any app owned or controlled by a “foreign adversary”, thanks to this precedent. The decision as to which nations are considered a “Foreign Adversary” is made by the U.S. Secretary Of Commerce.

        I am not a lawyer or lawmaker, so someone please correct me if I’m wrong. Here’s the full text of the legislation (emphases mine):

        DIVISION H-- PROTECTING AMERICANS FROM FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLICATIONS ACT

        Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act

        (Sec. 2) This division prohibits distributing, maintaining, updating, or providing internet hosting services for a foreign adversary controlled application (e.g., TikTok). However, the prohibition does not apply to a covered application that executes a qualified divestiture as determined by the President.

        Under the division, a foreign adversary controlled application is an application directly or indirectly operated by (1) ByteDance, Ltd., TikTok, their subsidiaries, successors, related entities they control, or entities controlled by a foreign adversary country; or (2) a social media company that is controlled by a foreign adversary country and determined by the President to present a significant threat to national security. (Here, a social media company excludes any website or application primarily used to post product reviews, business reviews, or travel information and reviews.)

        For the purposes of this division, a foreign adversary country includes North Korea, China, Russia, and Iran.

        A qualified divestiture is a transaction that the President has determined (through an interagency process)

        • would result in the relevant foreign adversary controlled application no longer being controlled by a foreign adversary, and
        • precludes the establishment or maintenance of any operational relationship between the U.S. operations of the relevant application and any formerly affiliated entities that are controlled by a foreign adversary (including any cooperation with respect to the operation of a content recommendation algorithm or a data-sharing agreement).

        The prohibition applies 270 days after the date of the division’s enactment. The division authorizes the President to grant a one-time extension of up to 90 days to a covered application when the President has certified to Congress that (1) a path to executing a qualified divestiture of the covered application has been identified, (2) evidence of significant progress toward executing such qualified divestiture of the covered application has been produced, and (3) relevant legal agreements to enable execution of such qualified divestiture during the period of such extension are in place.

        Additionally, the division requires a covered foreign adversary controlled application to provide a user with all available account data (including posts, photos, and videos) at the user’s request before the prohibition takes effect. The account data must be provided in a machine-readable format.

        The division authorizes the Department of Justice to investigate violations and enforce its provisions. Entities that that violate the division are subject to civil penalties for violations. An entity that violates the prohibition on distributing, maintaining, updating, or providing internet hosting services for a covered application is subject to a maximum penalty of $5,000 multiplied by the number of U.S. users who have accessed, maintained, or updated the application as a result of the violation. An entity that violates the requirement to provide account data to a user upon request is subject to a maximum penalty of $500 multiplied by the number of U.S. users impacted by the violation.

        (Sec. 3) The division gives the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia exclusive jurisdiction over any challenge to the division. A challenge to the division must be brought within 165 days after the division’s enactment date. A challenge to any action, finding, or determination under the division must be brought with 90 days of the action, finding, or determination.

        DIVISION I–PROTECTING AMERICANS’ DATA FROM FOREIGN ADVERSARIES ACT OF 2024

        Protecting Americans’ Data from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act of 2024

        This division makes it unlawful for a data broker to sell, license, rent, trade, transfer, release, disclose, or otherwise make available specified personally identifiable sensitive data of individuals who reside in the United States to North Korea, China, Russia, or Iran or an entity controlled by such a country (e.g., headquartered in or owned by a person in the country).

        Sensitive data includes government-issued identifiers (e.g., Social Security numbers), financial account numbers, biometric information, genetic information, precise geolocation information, and private communications (e.g., texts or emails).

        A data broker generally includes an entity that sells or otherwise provides data of individuals that the entity did not collect directly from the individuals. A data broker does not include an entity that transmits an individual’s data or communications at the request or direction of the individual or an entity that makes news or information available to the general public.

        The division provides for enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission.

      • pyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        isn’t it unconstitutional to target specific entities with laws?

        • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          The TikTok ban law doesn’t actually specifically target TikTok in that way, instead it targets applications owned or controlled by a foreign adversary, of which TikTok is the first one enforcement has been turned against. RedNote or RedBook or whatever it’s called almost certainly is also banned under it, and it’s just a matter of the law being enforced.

          TikTok could have gotten out of it by selling or splitting in such a way that US TikTok was not under Chinese control.

        • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Yes, but the courts used some bullshit reasoning to uphold it anyway. They said it didn’t constitute a punishment because the law required a sale rather than a confiscation, and because the company could theoretically re-enter the market with a different app (lol).

          I suppose it’s similar to eminent domain where the government can force you to sell your house if it’s in the way of something like a rail line, but it’s not considered a punishment since you’re compensated for it (at whatever price they decide is fair). Basically, the government is allowed to fuck with you quite a bit so long as they can provide a justification for why they’re doing it that isn’t personal.

          • pyre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 hours ago

            thank you; that was very informative. I tried to look it up but every article seemed to approach it from the first amendment angle and I didn’t find anything about equal protection.

            • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 hours ago

              The phrase you’re looking for for a law that targets a specific entity is “Bill of Attainder.”

              This was my source for the info, that includes the text of the court ruling.

          • pyre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 hours ago

            it’s called the law of the land, not the law of the people. if laws don’t cover non-american entities then they can’t commit crimes.

  • cRazi_man@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    I’m too old to be up to date with American internet culture. What app are the cool kids using now?

  • Etterra@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I mean both suck and short form & vertical videos are trash, so now it’s your chance to watch better content.