"TikTok is stealing your data."
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
And what does the meme say?
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Ring-ding-ding-ding-dingeringeding!
Gering-ding-ding-ding-dingeringeding!
Gering-ding-ding-ding-dingeringeding! -
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
There's definitely some malice in there i don't doubt, which likely bleeds into the unwillingness to prove one's biases wrong
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
If only someone gave a shit about the law
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
It says the US wants to be the only one stealing your data and spying on you.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Least glowing comment
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
As far as I am concerned, the number of people spying on US Citizens is being decreased.
Celebrate that.
-
/home/pineappleloverreplied to [email protected] last edited by
Then why wasn't tik tok blocked immediately instead of being allowed to operate for years.
-
Not high. Upvoted nonetheless because what you point out is a very important counterbalance in the conversation. It would be naive to believe there’s not some price paid for what looks like a more secure life.
Yes, china is doing horrible things behind the scenes. Uyghur genocide is beyond reprehensible, aggressive imperialist expansion posturing in the South China Sea, the Taiwan mess, wildly extreme censorship, the great firewall, crackdowns on dissent, intimidation and coercion of Chinese abroad under threat of harming their families in mainland china, corporate espionage, the list goes on.
But here’s the rub.
The cost of just existing here in the states is becoming simply unbelievable, literally. Chinese folks are asking us Americans on this new app if it’s true we need to pay thousands for an ambulance or work 2 jobs to simply afford to live. It’s so outlandish that these Chinese people thought it was their own government telling them made-up ‘America bad’ stories.
As you point out we pay a price for our lifestyle too, and the laundry list is just as long. Despite the evil things our government does, I’m wondering why we ended up with a system where you could become homeless from the financial shock of one ambulance ride, whereas the average Chinese doesn’t have to go live on a sidewalk in the same scenario.
So despite the roughly similar evil governments, why the disparity in daily affordable life?
If you’re at all open to critiquing new information and updating your worldview to accommodate, then you would probably be wondering similar questions as I am now.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
The problem is this doesn't apply across the board. Why is it only illegal if they're selling it to a foreign company? It should be illegal to sell it full stop. This just gives the US government a monopoly on the information which I'm more afraid of than a foreign country having my data since I live here and they can directly affect me.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
So technically you're right, but the law they passed left a HUGE loophole. And by loophole I mean just don't be based on those counties and you can gobble up whatever data you like.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
No one gives a shit if your data is collected. I (and presumably you) are not worthwhile targets. The issue is the Chinese government using social media apps based in China to feed anti-US/pro-Chinese propaganda. I'd bet $100 that if (mostly likely when) China invades Taiwan all Chinese owned social media outlets will instantly feature lots of anti-Taiwan content in every country that they may turn for help to try and turn the US population's opinion more favorable to China's side.
-
I subscribe to anything you said, except obviously the last sentence.
If there is new information I'm always open to it, as long as it doesn't come from obviously bad sources. I'm just fed up with people simping for the picture the chinese propaganda paints as they grow tired of the US propaganda. It's so stupid and unnecessary, and I saw your post as one of those. Apologies if it wasn't meant that way.Chinese people do suffer from economical hardship as well, it's just badly documented and the problems are different but comparably awful.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
The person you’re talking to is deliberately not going to agree with anything you’re saying, fyi.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
I’m really not able to keep up with the hive on this. One minute- they hate TikTok? A day later, they defend TikTok…
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Cool so what does this law do for me again? I live in America i personally will never interact with those 4 countries. The wording is also dangerous calling Chinaa foreign adversary comparable with the other 3. Which is dangerous. We are in active war with 3 where as China we do massive business.
Passed in April 2024 so useful when Facebook was a broker for Russia in 2016
DIVISION H-- PROTECTING AMERICANS FROM FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLICATIONS ACTProtecting 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.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
They aren't defending TikTok so much as calling the bluff. The US govt doesn't actually give a rats ass about privacy or data collection. Some relics in Congress were convinced its a national security threat and needs to be banned OR SOLD TO A US BASED BUYER (I'm personally thinking this is the Muskrat's doing, but that's all conspiracy) to preserve national security.
A massive, comprehensive data privacy law would've covered the TikTok base and any software by any other threat. Home run, Grand slam, easy win and easy points.
Of course it's not going that way because it was never about national security.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
"Hey! We can't let them steal that. I wanted to steal that!"
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Didn't read.
-
[email protected]replied to [email protected] last edited by
Yeah for sure, its why I usually stick to short replies.