Current Events > Bye bye, TikTok: House votes overwhelmingly to ban it

(+) Yeah! (+)

_____Cait posted...

Yeah they sell that data . Wonder who it goes to.

Nothing stopping Temu from buying american data.

The hysterics from congress does look like them trying to ban violent video games before. The threat must of been real because the ESRB was formed. Trying to force a sale is wrong. It would be like Japan forcing Microsoft to sell to operate in their country. Instead Microsoft has another division, Microsoft Japan Co., Ltd.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


every generation has not gone through the chaos and upheaval that social media has caused, and it is questionable whether democracy will even survive it

_____Cait posted...

Werent those adults

it was also almost ten years ago and tiktok wasn't even particularly popular at the time, it was way more of a twitter meme

It's painfully obvious who gets their news from TikTok itt

The after effects will honestly be pretty interesting to watch.

W_S_C_M posted...

No more tide pod kids then?

lol

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

No, that's not his logic at all and your point makes zero actual sense. The pride flag is an expression of speech, Tiktok is a platform. They're not even the same thing. You have a right to express free speech, not a platform for it.

...Which all of this debate and legislating is pointless anyway, because Tiktok isn't going anywhere anytime soon, and even if it did, something else will just take its place.

He says Facebook is a danger to America for no reason other than they had a presidential preference in 2020 and it wasnt him.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/0/07a67bb7.png

What the hell are "LOCKBOXES"?

Is Diaper Donny confusing facebook with loot box games?

Block_that_Kick posted...

He says Facebook is a danger to America for no reason other than they had a presidential preference in 2020 and it wasnt him.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/0/07a67bb7.png

Dude types in all caps and somehow has a following under the age of 30.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/14/business/steven-mnuchin-tiktok/index.html

Former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said Thursday hes assembling a team of investors to make a bid to buy TikTok.
This comes a day after the House passed a measure to ban the Chinese-owned social media giant or force a sale to a US-operated owner.
Its a great business and Im going to put together a group to buy TikTok, Mnuchin said in an interview on CNBC Thursday morning. Even though TikTok is likely unprofitable, its worth a lot of money, he added.

Mnuchin said he would give existing US investors the option to roll over their stakes in TikTok but stressed that no entity would have more than 10% control. But he declined to name any individuals on the team hes putting together. Theres no way that the Chinese would ever let a US company own something like this in China, he said. From his time in the administration, he said hes seen evidence that having TikTok on your phone gives it the ability to collect an awful lot of data.

But ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok, may never be allowed to be sold to any company outside of China because of measures the government began putting into place in 2020. The Chinese government deems TikTok a sensitive technology and officials have said theyd oppose any forced sale that would involve exporting it into the hands of a foreign owner. Mnuchin and TikTok didnt immediately respond to CNNs requests for comment.
Dan Ives, senior equity analyst at Wedbush Securities, told CNN that ByteDance and China will never sell TikTok with the source code the special sauce that makes the app so successful and valuable.

Without the source code, this would be like buying an F1 car without the engine. It would be illogical, Ives said. Mnuchin, though, said hes looking to find a solution where the Chinese government will allow TikTok to be sold without a technology transfer. Mnuchin, who now leads Liberty Strategic Capital, a private equity firm, was an early advocate for forcing a sale of TikTok to a US company. But he faced opposition from other members of former President Donald Trumps cabinet when the sale was proposed in 2020. Trump supported a ban at the time. Hes since changed his stance, arguing that it would benefit Facebook.
Facebook has been very bad for our country, he said in a separate interview on CNBC earlier in the week. Meta, the parent company of Facebook, didnt immediately respond to CNN.

I believe he would support a sale, Mnuchin said Thursday, referring to Trump. Ill call him up later and ask him. He added that hes been in touch with the former president in recent weeks regarding TikTok but has not discussed his nascent effort to acquire it. Thursdays TikTok news comes just one week after Mnuchin led a $1 billion lifeline rescue of embattled regional lender New York Community Bank. The TikTok bill the House passed is now heading to the Senate, where it faces a much larger uphill battle in getting approved. President Joe Biden said he would sign the bill into law if the Senate passes it. Even if that happens, any kind of TikTok ban would likely be fought in courts. Already Montana was prevented from moving forward with a law to effectively ban the app after a federal judge blocked it last year.

Ives, the tech analyst, said he sees a 25% chance that the TikTok legislation ultimately becomes law, forcing a sale of the company. He said countless parties are undoubtedly considering making an offer to buy TikTok should it go up for sale. Its sharks. They see blood in the water, he said. However, the more likely buyer, according to Ives, would be a tech giant like Microsoft or Oracle, which already has a relationship with TikTok, and not a financial player like Mnuchin.

This what GOP really wants a MAGA to buy tiktok

name_unknown posted...

This what GOP really wants a MAGA to buy tiktok

Why is biden so willing to sign the legislation if it comes to his desk, then? This is doubly bad for him because it pisses off young voters who he desperately needs and it gives a hugely popular platform to republican control.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Freedom to assemble in public forum yes. Not on privately owned land or domain.

Tiktok is corporate owned, imagine it as a place of business. Its not a public forum, you dont not have free speech on privately owned areas. Even here on gamefaqs you dont have free speech. This isnt the public forum, and if you dont abide by the rules of the owners you can be removed.

Being able to create a platform falls under free speech for the creators end as well.

For which there are limits and regulations like everything else, especially if those violate other laws.

name_unknown posted...

This what GOP really wants a MAGA to buy tiktok

It worked for Twitter... right?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Not every platform on the internet is, no. That's why your rights aren't being violated when you get suspended from gfaqs or anything else.

And there's nothing stopping you from creating your own social media platform

That's what Trump did after he was banned from Twitter

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


We also live in a country where a corporate business is considered a "person" and that money=speech

So yeah, the discourse around having the "right" to use a privately-owned social media platform is getting ridiculous, but our entire concept of what constitutes "free speech" has gotten pretty fucked up

You essentially give up your rights whenever you click "I Agree"

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


And those platforms can be restricted or banned if they provided a palpable threat.

We've seen it happen with 8chan, we've seen it happen with various subreddits, etc.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


A site being banned =/= forbidden from using the internet lmao

HylianFox posted...

We also live in a country where a corporate business is considered a "person" and that money=speech

So yeah, the discourse around having the "right" to use a privately-owned social media platform is getting ridiculous, but our entire concept of what constitutes "free speech" has gotten pretty fucked up

You essentially give up your rights whenever you click "I Agree"

..but a business owned by someone from another country shouldn't be considered an american citizen, should it?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Its virtually confirmed to be cureently used as Spyware by a hostile government. So yeah its kinds harmful.

And 8chan was taken down due to their illegal content which shows that content is also restricted. 8chan still had the right to create their website before they violated the law. Its still covered under free speech. Its why sites like 4chan and kiwifarms are still up.

If organized terrorist attacks started brewing on one of those sites, those would be taken down too.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Right? Terminally online TikTokers with zero media literacy or civil literacy are really outing themselves here

good?

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


I dont entirely agree with that ruling either.

American law applies to everything that works in America, not just citizens.

Thats not necessarily the case.

Like I said, at that point this is a seperate argument of whether it's actually used as spyware and used maliciously by an actively hostile government or if this is just xenophobic fearmongering.

No, not really. Its been pretty much settled that yes, it's being used as Spyware and yes, this government is hostile for reasons that are totally legitimate as being described as hostile.

Or in other words whether the law is just. Because something like pride flags can also hypothetically be given an exception to be restricted too if the judges ever became so Christo-fascist.

Pride flags aren't a platform, they are an expression, same as confederate flags. Its WHERE you can display them that is relevant.

A more realistic analogy would be obscenity though. At that point the argument is a moral/ethical argument over legal. Either way, it's still covered under free speech by default before it's determined that it's violated a law.

Trying to separate the moral and ethical from the legal sounds like a recipe for disaster. What are laws if not generally accepted standards for morality and ethics?

Tiktok is not an expression; it as a platform. A place of business. It can EXPRESS itself as csn its owners but its existence itself is not an act of expression. Thats a laughable notion.

Toonstrack posted...

I dont entirely agree with that ruling either.

Thats not necessarily the case.

No, not really. Its been pretty much settled that yes, it's being used as Spyware and yes, this government is hostile for reasons that are totally legitimate as being described as hostile.

Pride flags aren't a platform, they are an expression, same as confederate flags. Its WHERE you can display them that is relevant.

Trying to separate the moral and ethical from the legal sounds like a recipe for disaster. What are laws if not generally accepted standards for morality and ethics?

Tiktok is not an expression; it as a platform. A place of business. It can EXPRESS itself as csn its owners but its existence itself is not an act of expression. Thats a laughable notion

every time I see your username

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/1/11df1f0b.jpg

SHRlKE posted...

every time I see your username

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/1/11df1f0b.jpg

Yes I actually don't know anything about that game tho haha.

My username originated as a reference to Strakk from Bionicle

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Morality defines what we base our laws on though. You cannot separate the two. Morality exists without legality, but legality does not exist without morality.

In any case, I was trying to have a civil conversation with you because I thought you just weren't aware of what I was saying but I can see now you're just going your usual right wing handbook of playing dense, gish galloping, and denying official evidence you don't agree with.

Yea im not a right winger, dude, you just don't have an argument and you have wildly off base assumptions about how... almost everything here works. Its fsr from only the right having concerns with tiktok.

Tiktok is not a form of expression, point blank period. Its just not. To compare it to a pride flag is a false equivalence.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Thats far from what I said. I never said the law was always right,nor is that the case. Slavery was once legal interracial marriage was once illegal. None of those things had any bearing on the actual morality of them.

You are. And you just play dense and have every point given to you go out one ear and out the other. Tell us more about your defence of Rittenhouse, transphobia, and how Trump deserves to be on the ballot.
TikTok is a form of assembly and a form of expression as an platform that their creators made.

Im not, you just don't have an argument. Your accusations are in accurate snd without context, but I expect that at this point.

Tiktok is nor a form of assembly, it is a corporation-ran business, not an assembly of individuals. Your attempts to conflate the too is laughable and dangerous and would allow sites like 8chan to plead their right to exist.

Th3HonestTruth posted...

You really defending your bud trying his best Trump meltdown impression just because you've known him for awhile?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/5/5d496999.png

Using saikyo style as a point of reference is a self own lmao.

Im no where near a right winger and if you have seen the majority of my posts(most of which are on another board) you'd know how much the local right wingers hate it. Its far more than you guys.

Th3HonestTruth posted...

You really defending your bud trying his best Trump meltdown impression just because you've known him for awhile?

And you are?

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/e/efaedd71.jpg