Bill to ban TikTok is the topic of the hour

I do not use Tik-Tok, but I am totally against the bill that they want to put out for banning it, because once they ban that website, they can start banning any other social media that they want. The bill is not specific for the one website. Also, why is it not okay for a social media , which is only partially owned by China , to be allowed; but it is fine if China is buying up our farmland and businesses ?
The reason I support restricting use of all kinds of websites for kids under the age of 18 is the same reason I support banning cigarette and alcohol sales to kids under age 18 or 21, depending on the state or substance.

These sites have been proven to be harmful to teens' minds and addictive. Congress has the legal right to regulate commerce. Congress has the legal right to protect Americans from harm of all kinds.

I'm sure it will be a legal battle, but what isn't? Truly - in this litigious society where all tech companies can do is salivate over more profits, with Greed as their God, of course they will spend $million$ on lawyers.

6 tech executives who raise their kids tech-free or seriously limit their screen time
 

Where does all the data go from google, or microsoft, or linkedin, or facebook, or instagram, or meta, or "X"? IDK, but that data is being spewed all over the internet. It is the wild, wild, west. It is a vast untamed territory, that is growing exponentially now. Nothing but turning it off is going to stop the sharing of confidential data. We will declare a war on misinformation, and spend billions to no avail. Just like the war on drugs, or the war on poverty. They didn't work. They are attempts at fixing a disaster with a Band-Aid.
 

Where does all the data go from google, or microsoft, or linkedin, or facebook, or instagram, or meta, or "X"? IDK, but that data is being spewed all over the internet. It is the wild, wild, west. It is a vast untamed territory, that is growing exponentially now. Nothing but turning it off is going to stop the sharing of confidential data. We will declare a war on misinformation, and spend billions to no avail. Just like the war on drugs, or the war on poverty. They didn't work. They are attempts at fixing a disaster with a Band-Aid.
All the data collected needs to be privatized no matter who collects it whether its a business, or social media or where the ownership lies. Focusing solely on TikTok or other foreign owned data collecting agents is just plugging one of manly data leaks. But we must start and if fear of our enemy China is the spark so be it.

China is our enemy so they should have no pipeline into our country so this bill is better than doing nothing. Hopefully one day we'll have a Congress that get's tired of "winning", bouncing back and forth btwn crises(both real and imagined) and get back to its real job which is to govern.
 
I have watched many videos (pro and con) and read many things about TikTok in the past couple of years and I made the choice not to use it. The key word for me is having that choice. I would not be happy if that CHOICE was taken away from my federal government.

I do understand about the security concerns but there are larger concerns that aren't discussed often...such as China manufacturing most cell phones and semiconductor chips. Those are major security concerns too but not much is being done to address that issue.
 
I do understand about the security concerns but there are larger concerns that aren't discussed often...such as China manufacturing most cell phones and semiconductor chips. Those are major security concerns too but not much is being done to address that issue.

Wiki - Whataboutism or whataboutery (as in "what about…?") is a pejorative for the strategy of responding to an accusation with a counter-accusation instead of a defense of the original accusation.

From a logical and argumentative point of view, whataboutism is considered a variant of the tu-quoque pattern (Latin 'you too', term for a counter-accusation), which is a subtype of the ad-hominem argument.[1][2][3][4]

The communication intent is often to distract from the content of a topic (red herring). The goal may also be to question the justification for criticism and the legitimacy, integrity, and fairness of the critic, which can take on the character of discrediting the criticism, which may or may not be justified. Common accusations include double standards, and hypocrisy, but it can also be used to relativize criticism of one's own viewpoints or behaviors. (A: "Long-term unemployment often means poverty in Germany." B: "And what about the starving in Africa and Asia?").[5] Related manipulation and propaganda techniques in the sense of rhetorical evasion of the topic are the change of topic and false balance (bothsidesism).[6]
 
Mnuchin, remember him? formed some consortium to buy TikTok
Courtesy of claude.ai :

Yes, I'm familiar with the situation you're referring to regarding Steven Mnuchin and his efforts to acquire TikTok in 2020.

Some key points:

  • In 2020, the Trump administration sought to ban TikTok in the U.S. or force its Chinese parent company ByteDance to sell the app's American operations, citing national security concerns.
  • Steven Mnuchin, who was Treasury Secretary at the time, took the lead in reviewing ByteDance's proposal to restructure TikTok to address the security issues raised by the U.S. government.
  • Mnuchin brought in companies like Oracle, Walmart, and other investors to try to form a new U.S.-based company called TikTok Global that would own TikTok's operations and data for U.S. users.
  • This consortium bid over $25 billion to buy a majority stake in TikTok's U.S. business from ByteDance and create TikTok Global.
  • The deal faced pushback from ByteDance and Chinese regulators over security and export control concerns related to TikTok's core algorithms.
  • With the Biden administration coming in, the CloudWalk proposal spearheaded by Mnuchin eventually stalled out in 2021 amid the ongoing security review process.
So in summary, yes, the former Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin did lead an investor group including Oracle and Walmart in a high-profile bid in 2020 to acquire TikTok's U.S. operations and restructure it as a new American company called TikTok Global to resolve national security concerns at the time. However, the deal ultimately fell through.
 
I have watched many videos (pro and con) and read many things about TikTok in the past couple of years and I made the choice not to use it. The key word for me is having that choice. I would not be happy if that CHOICE was taken away from my federal government.

I do understand about the security concerns but there are larger concerns that aren't discussed often...such as China manufacturing most cell phones and semiconductor chips. Those are major security concerns too but not much is being done to address that issue.
But the government already banned certain companies from selling phones here: https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/26/us/us-washington-huawei-zte-ban-security-risk-intl-hnk/index.html

The Feds ban LOTS of stuff from being sold here because stuff is expected to meet certain quality and safety standards.
I wish they would ban certain lipsticks and other make-ups that are full of lead or other heavy metals. They have not done that yet.

As for "choice", do you imagine any government will give you or I unlimited choices at anything? Can I legally open an opium hookah lounge in my living room? NO. "Boo hoo, you mean Feds, you're taking away my free choice!"

What do you think government is? Political system - Functions, Governance, Structure

Want to see what happens in real life rght now when there is no coherent system of government? Look at Haiti.

As for choice, TikTok users have many other social media platforms to choose from.
 
The laws can change the freedom of the culture to express itself. There have been some laws changed lately that have impacted our society in dramatic ways. One thing can lead to another and another until it is illegal to "x". We need to be very carful on how this bill is crafted. Now who is going to do that? :)
 
Nothing more than political theater disguised as a "national security concern". Being "Chinese" is the attention getter, but the fact of the matter is that all social media apps(and, all apps in general) collect and use or sell as much user information as they can possibly get away with.
Yes. Diversion 101.
 
All the data collected needs to be privatized no matter who collects it whether its a business, or social media or where the ownership lies. Focusing solely on TikTok or other foreign owned data collecting agents is just plugging one of manly data leaks. But we must start and if fear of our enemy China is the spark so be it.

China is our enemy so they should have no pipeline into our country so this bill is better than doing nothing. Hopefully one day we'll have a Congress that get's tired of "winning", bouncing back and forth btwn crises(both real and imagined) and get back to its real job which is to govern.
I think all our data should be OURS. WE should have the option rights, the choice, to SELL IT or RENT IT to them or not.

Example: let us imagine hell has frozen over and I decide to join Facebook. Let's say, under this new law that says I own my data and I have the right to sell or rent it, Facebook offers me $25.00 a month in exchange for all the data it's going to gather and share about me. I need grocery money, so I agree to that sad bargain.

Ah, but FB would probably price my data much lower than $25.00 a month because advertisers don't care what older, poor people think. They will give me $7.00 a month. But I decide to take that deal anyway. FB then has to PayPal me $7.00 a month until I die.

If they get a wealthy celebrity on their site, lots of people want to follow them, so their data is worth a lot - the celebrity is offered $10,000 a month.

The thing is, social media companies decided long ago that our data is valuable - it is something to be bought and traded. The problem is they have not cut us in on the deal.

If I sell my plasma, that plasma is MINE to sell. It is a body part. If I tell true stories from my life, those stories are mine to sell.

FB could also say, "Donate your data to us and be a good person! We will give you more access to features on our site if you DONATE your data to us!" Fine. If people want to fall for that logic, they can. If they really think FB needs their donations, I cry at that thought, but FB can cry poverty and fool them, I guess. IDK if that is illegal or not.

It's like all the people who have donated money to Pat Robertson's "ministry" over the decades. Did they have any idea Pat Robertson's net worth was about $100 million when he died?

That's the answer, IMO. Our data should be deemed personal property and we get to have obvious and transparent control over it. (E.G. what if there was a sidebar on every social media site that showed how much data was being transported and shared on a minute-by-minute basis? Make the sharing that obvious and transparent so people could actually see it in real time. They can right-click to hide the sidebar if they don't want to see it. )

I think this is already written in the Terms and Conditions of these sites and people unknowingly click OK to that. But if they could see it in action in real time, on every site, maybe that would help them understand? Especially parents of teens and children! Watch what this site is sharing with total strangers about your kid.

IDK - all I know is that billionaires and milionaries are making tons of money off of us and we sure do not get our share. Moreover, when politicians would like to tax the wealthy so maybe we could build more abundant low-income housing (for all the poor slobs paying 50% of income to rent), they wealthy cry "FREEDOM", as if they are about to be enslaved.

The only "slaves" in this picture are the slaves to FB and TikTok and all the rest who are gathering their data, and selling it "on their behalf".
 

Back
Top