Senate passes TikTok ban bill, sending it to Biden, who has already committed to signing it

I posted this in the other thread, but..

Now congress can tell any company to get fucked and sell to the highest bidder (edit: via bills crafted to target them specifically)? So much for free market republicans.

China will just find another company to buy our data from, because as it turns out, the problem isn't just TikTok, it's the fact the it's legal for companies (foreign and domestic) to sell and exchange our data in the first place. TikTok will still collect the same data, and instead of it going straight to China, it'll go to a rich white fuck first and they'll be the ones to sell it to China instead.

And if the problem is the fact that it's addictive, well, we have plenty of our own home grown addictions for people to sink their time into. You don't see congress telling those companies to get sold to a new owner.

it'll go to a rich white fuck first and they'll be the ones to sell it to China instead.

And that's really what most politicians care about. Meta and Co. are butthurt that the new dopamine dealer on the block is cutting so ruthlessly into their numbers, especially among the younger generations. Normally, Meta et. al. would just engage in their typical antitrust behavior and buy them out, but they can't because a) ByteDance doesn't need them or their money and b) I'd be surprised if China let them sell such a valuable tool willingly.

This is just protectionism under the guise of national security, plain and simple. We've heard, "oh but national security!!!" countless times before, and if this was truly the main concern, they'd be going after all the other blatantly egregious privacy snoopers as well.
Incorrect, the Bill is broad but it's not any company for any reason.

The "PROTECTING AMERICANS’ DATA FROM FOREIGN ADVERSARIES ACT OF 2024" has this to say:

(a) Prohibition.—It shall be unlawful for a data broker to sell, license, rent, trade, transfer, release, disclose, provide access to, or otherwise make available personally identifiable sensitive data of a United States individual to— (1) any foreign adversary country; or (2) any entity that is controlled by a foreign adversary. (b) Enforcement By Federal Trade Commission.— (1) UNFAIR OR DECEPTIVE ACTS OR PRACTICES.—A violation of this section shall be treated as a violation of a rule defining an unfair or a deceptive act or practice under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)). (2) POWERS OF COMMISSION.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The Commission shall enforce this section in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) were incorporated into and made a part of this section. (B) PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES.—Any person who violates this section shall be subject to the penalties and entitled to the privileges and immunities provided in the Federal Trade Commission Act. (3) AUTHORITY PRESERVED.—Nothing in this section may be construed to limit the authority of the Commission under any other provision of law.

and then like a bunch of pages of hyper-specific definitions for the above terms.
- Am I misunderstanding something this actually sounds like a positive thing. Although I wish it was not just for "foreign adversary country; or any entity that is controlled by a foreign adversary." And instead just in general
- The big point is, how does that power get used?
  
  There is no due process. So someone like Trump could just declare a company to be a foreign adversary. If this was like an Anti-Trust case that had to be built and proven in court we wouldn't have a problem with it. But it's not. You're just literally declaring it, no evidence required.
- Ah, so congress can just write hyper specific definitions that only apply to one company (as long as they don't directly name said company). Got it, seems like great precedent to me.
China made American companies partner and share their IP with Chinese companies to access the Chinese market when the Chinese market was opened to outsiders back in the 90s. That’s how China caught up to us in technology, they straight up stole the IP and changed terms on the American companies. I believe there is some tit for tat happening here. China has done a lot of fucked up shit and they are definitely actively hacking American infrastructure and social engineering against American interests. They are harvesting American data and tweaking the algorithm to actively undermine American interests. Whether you agree or disagree, China started this fight. China has banned most American social media already.
- China doesn't need TikTok to do any of that, including the data collection. They can just get it from data brokers (either by purchasing or stealing it). Because guess what? Data collection and/or sale of said data to foreign countries wasn't made illegal with this bill.
- A. Creating laws that let us act like an authoritarian regime is not a good thing.
  
  B. They didn't need to do any of that with TikTok. Late stage capitalism is radicalizing people every day. All they need to do is get out of the way of them finding each other.
The problem isn't actually just that China takes our data, it's that they control the algorithm on tiktok for what users see, thereby giving them the ability to manipulate the public.
- Yeah! And that's only a privilege for white oligarchs! /s
- The US is terrified of the public becoming anti capitalist and anti colonialism which is what's happening. THEY want control of the narrative like they've had for decades so they can control the message.
The important thing is that it lives on American servers first, where the FBI and NSA can get at it.

If it lives on Chinese servers, the CIA have to get involved.
- They already moved it onto American servers, in 2022.
- TikTok's American data is already hosted on Oracle servers. Has been for awhile.
- It already does. They use Oracle for their American data.
You are missing the point. If somebody is gonna profit in any way from US citizens, the US oligarchs want their cut. If it was about controlling information, it would specifically mention about that and what is to be done about it. Making the company be US controlled increases the reach of government on it, yes, but it doesn't gaurantee or enforce it in any way. The thing it gaurantees is where the money will end up.
By the last few days all the trolls stopped even trying to argue this and just went to, "my congressional rep said it's a national security issue! And that abrogates the entire Constitution!"

As usual, when rights are being stripped it's for the protection of the children.
If you have an Amazon account, China already has all your info. This it congress trying to silence pro-palestine protesters and biden mad that TikTok doesn’t like him.

I hope this is challenged in court.
- This it congress trying to silence pro-palestine protesters and biden mad that TikTok doesn’t like him.
  
  it's definitely not just this, they're mad that one of the biggest social media companies isn't US based, and that they don't have full jurisdiction over them.
- Cry harder about Chineae malware?

This is the wrong way to go about solving this problem IMO, but then again the problem they're trying to solve is more about security than privacy as a right.

Watching from Europe I have no idea what the problem is. The US spies on our data, the CCP spies on our data. I can see why the US government might worry that they can't access the data (except TikTok runs its servers on Oracle databases in the US just to satisfy them). But I don't understand why the citizens of the US would support tightening the monopoly to just Facebook and Google.
- It’s not just about data and spying, it’s also about media and influence. The argument being made that it’s not a good idea to have a “hostile” nation effectively controlling one of the major/dominant social media platforms.
  
  There is also the trade issue of reciprocity, China bans many if not most of the western platforms, while they have free rein to operate theirs in the west.
- Its actually also a media problem. For example, the largest Tiktok account of a german politician belongs to Maximilian Krah, of the far right party AFD. Just yesterday it was revealed that his personal assistant is actually a Chinese spy. Krah himself voiced a lot of pro-Chinese opinions before, like being pro annexation of Taiwan and denying the genocide on the uigyurs.
  
  This begs the question if his Tiktok popularity is based on a non-biased algorithm or if the CCP made a deal with him, boosting his Tiktok popularity in exchange for being pro-China.
- The issue is that China controls the algorithm for what users see. This gives them the ability to manipulate users by showing specific content to sway their opinion on things. This is specifically about China's ability to manipulate US citizens.
Seems like a good plan to me. Forcing the companies with the most influence on American social issues to actually be operated by Americans seems like a no-brainer.
What's the security issue? That China has personal information about millions of Americans?

Who doesn't have personal information about millions of Americans these days?
- It isnt about past data, it's about current data and trends. It's also about a foreign government controlling what another government's citizens see through an algorithm.
- Haha right? Remember the Equifax breach? I think the security claim isn't genuine in intent, but I can believe that all else being equal, privacy violation does result in risk to security.
  
  Even more reason to solve the underlying issues and hold companies accountable for how they handle privacy and personal information. Ideally I'd like to see the hoarding of personal data be somehow demonitized.

Ew. I looked through the bill, and here are some parts I have issues with:

Main text

PROHIBITION OF FOREIGN ADVERSARY CON - TROLLED APPLICATIONS .—It shall be unlawful for an entity to distribute, maintain, or update (or enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of) a foreign adversary controlled application by carrying out, within the land or maritime borders of the United States, any of the following:

(A) Providing services to distribute, main- tain, or update such foreign adversary con- trolled application (including any source code of such application) by means of a marketplace (including an online mobile application store) through which users within the land or maritime borders of the United States may access, maintain, or update such application.

(B) Providing internet hosting services to enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of such foreign adversary controlled application for users within the land or maritime borders of the United States.

So basically, the US can block any form of software (not just social media) distributed by an adversary county for pretty much reason, and it can block any company providing access to anything from an adversary.

Definition of "controlled by a foreign adversary"

(g) DEFINITIONS .—In this section:6 (1) CONTROLLED BY A FOREIGN ADVERSARY .— The term ‘‘controlled by a foreign adversary’’ means, with respect to a covered company or other entity, that such company or other entity is--

(A) a foreign person that is domiciled in, is headquartered in, has its principal place of business in, or is organized under the laws of a foreign adversary country;

(B) an entity with respect to which a for- eign person or combination of foreign persons described in subparagraph (A) directly or indi- rectly own at least a 20 percent stake; or

(C) a person subject to the direction or control of a foreign person or entity described in subparagraph (A) or (B).

The adversary countries are (defined in a separate US code):

N. Korea
China
Russia
Iran

So if you live in any of these or work for a company based in any of these, you're subject to the law.

foreign adversary company definition

(3) FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLI - CATION .—The term ‘‘foreign adversary controlled application’’ means a website, desktop application, mobile application, or augmented or immersive technology application that is operated, directly or indirectly (including through a parent company, subsidiary, or affiliate), by—

(A) any of—

(i) ByteDance, Ltd.;

(ii) TikTok;

(iii) a subsidiary of or a successor to an entity identified in clause (i) or (ii) that is controlled by a foreign adversary; or

(iv) an entity owned or controlled, di- rectly or indirectly, by an entity identified in clause (i), (ii), or (iii); or

(B) a covered company that—

(i) is controlled by a foreign adversary; and

(ii) that is determined by the President to present a significant threat to the national security of the United States following the issuance of—

It specifically calls out TikTok and ByteDance, but it also allows the President to denote any other entity in one of those countries as a significant threat.

So here are my issues:

I, as a US citizen, can't choose to distribute software produced by an adversary as noted officially by the US government - this is a limitation on my first amendment protections, and I think this applies to FOSS if the original author is from one of those countries
the barrier to what counts is relatively low - just living in an adversary country or working for a company based on an adversary country seems to don't
barrier to a "covered company" is relatively low and probably easy to manipulate - basically needs 1M active users (not even US users), which the CIA could totally generate if needed

So I think the bill is way too broad (lots of "or"s), and I'm worried it could allow the government to ban competition with US company competitors. It's not as bad as I feared, but I still think it's harmful.

Anyway, thoughts?

Isn't Nginx written by a Russian? So is it now banned in the US? What other software has been effected by this legislation?
- Hah, well time to tell our CEO I'm shutting down our prod servers.
- No, but it could be. The President would need to start the process and give them 270 days to relocate to somewhere that's not Russia or sell to a non-Russian company or whatever.
- Tetris....
Thoughts? Someone turned a troll farm loose on this one. We've been getting ratioed for weeks saying this and now all the shills screaming that we must support the CCP and hate our own country because it's an obvious national security measure are gone. Ones that suspiciously needed the Constitution explained to them at the most basic level.

We got played by the people that are supposed to represent us.
- It's not that bad, but I do think it's bad, and I outlined why. But my concerns aren't with whether TikTok is good or bad (I think it's bad, hence why I don't use it), I'm more concerned with granting the federal government even more power with vaguely written laws.
  
  The CCP can burn to the ground as far as I care.
I'm not sure it would cover open source software since it seems to be more concerned with data than the actual code. If that open source software is being used by a company controlled by a foreign adversary then that would probably apply but if it's open source software created by a foreign adversary but being used by a US company I don't think that would.

The actual wording of the bill seems pretty vague so I could be wrong and they might be able to apply it just to software but that would kind of to against the entire option B that they're currently giving ByteDance where they can keep Tik Tok running by selling it to an American company.
- literally all you would have to do for OSS is just fork it to someone living in america, and develop it from there.
- The actual wording of the bill seems pretty vague
  
  And that's the issue. Yeah, it probably won't apply to FOSS today, but times change and maybe it will in 10+ years.
"Hello, we are ClickClock, a totally different (😉😉😉) social media company hoping to fill the void of that one social media company that recently went under. As a matter of fact, with their recent layoffs we were even able to hire much of their talent and stuff. But totally different!"

That's about how trivial it would be to get around this if the legislation was too specific
- Sure, and the more general it is, the more likely the government can get away with shady stuff, like the NSA did with the FISA rubber stamp courts.
  
  This doesn't seem nearly as bad as that, but I also don't think the stakes are all that high if they make things too specific.
Doesn't that mean games like Genshin Impact and Honkai by Chinese companies like HoYo will be banned then too in the states?
- No, but it probably could be. I think Fortnite also qualifies.
  
  The bill only allows the federal government to require companies to sell or be banned, it doesn't ban anything on its own.

once again - not a ban, a seizure. Steve Mnuchin is heading a group of government insiders who want to buy TikTok, and this bill bans it if and only if they don't sell. The government has decided that TikTok is a dangerous propaganda and espionage network and intends to steal it and run it themselves. Even if you think that TikTok is that dangerous you have to ask yourself: why is it legal for everyone else and why does our government want so badly to do it themselves?

Yup. And the precedent this sets is horrifying. Even monopolies get due process. Being able to declare a company as a foreign enemy and force them to leave the market or be bought out is a ridiculous measure in a supposedly free society.
If China really is using TikTok for psyops, then they will refused to sell, flood TikTok with anti-government sentiment for its remaining days, and then direct people to just use the TikTok website hosted in China (is our government going to start blocking access to websites too?).

One silver line here is "the youths" will learn, in an unusually clear way, that the government effects their lives and can screw up their lives.
- (is our government going to start blocking access to websites too?).
  
  I can't imagine why they wouldn't. The movie industry is already lobbying for it
- You know TikTok is global right?
  
  But yeah Biden is just over here casually giving Trump better chances.
Because then Facebook will pay for your reelection campaign?
so they can do the death penalty on a company, they have a model

they just don't do it to Exxon or Facebook or Monsanto or...
First off, source? Second, the npr interview I heard mentioned specifically that China has to approve the sale because the algorithm is proprietary to a Chinese company. So anyone "buying TikTok" is buying a name and none of the actual bones of the social media platform
- source?
  
  First page when you google 'Steve Mnuchin'
  
  the npr interview I heard
  
  source?
- Aren't the bones the cheap part now? Think truth social for instance, why was it supposedly worth so much if anyone can spin up a Mastadon instance and make it the same restrictions over the weekend. The userbase numbers are all that mattered there I assume. Why is reddit worth more than Lemmy? Is it because the bones are expensive? Or is it that they have access to a large userbase already.

Oh no, this includes "aids" to Israel isn't it...

Why the hell do Israel needs more money?! They are not even close to poor...

It's not about that.... It's about feeding the porks of the military industrial complex
- theres enough corruption to go around, dear. something can have more than one abhorrent cause.
pay for each Palestinian murdered, raped, or tortured.

we are now in the process of cooking my friends.

Support your local darknet if you do not like censorship and violation of our rights

It's free :)

we are now in the process of cooking my friends

Would you like some A1 sauce with your rack of Nathan?
- i would just like to experience nature in solitude my friend. That is all.

I didn't know it was legal for a law to make it through the senate that fast

lol

nah it’s legit, just look at any of the military spending bills which rocket through at warp speed
- Oh that's why it passed so fast, it was the aid package that was bundled with it

Whew the propaganda smokescreen almost fully fell apart with people waking up and seeing us support Genocide. Good thing we went full authoritarianism to stop it!

Free speech was always a lie I guess

All parties involved are asinine. The lawmakers, the company, both governments, the voters and the users.

The free market for me but not for thee

US apps all banned in China.
- "Well he did it first" is really not how I want a government to be run tbh
- Yeah, that's true, but China doesn't claim to be a beacon of capitalism

China should force apple to sell off it's Chinese business to a Chinese company.

China doesn't need to, Apple is complying with Chinese law (remove all vpn related apps, all un-registered foreign app are removed and storing Chinese datas in Chinese servers).

Apple is likely the most complying foreign company in China.

As of the Resolving Differences phase this is where we are at with the text of the bill.

BTW, not a ban. It was never a ban.

Click to Expand

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

SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE. This division may be cited as the “Protecting Americans’ Data from Foreign Adversaries Act of 2024”.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON TRANSFER OF PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE SENSITIVE DATA OF UNITED STATES INDIVIDUALS TO FOREIGN ADVERSARIES. (a) Prohibition.—It shall be unlawful for a data broker to sell, license, rent, trade, transfer, release, disclose, provide access to, or otherwise make available personally identifiable sensitive data of a United States individual to—

(1) any foreign adversary country; or

(2) any entity that is controlled by a foreign adversary.

(b) Enforcement By Federal Trade Commission.—

(1) UNFAIR OR DECEPTIVE ACTS OR PRACTICES.—A violation of this section shall be treated as a violation of a rule defining an unfair or a deceptive act or practice under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)).

(2) POWERS OF COMMISSION.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Commission shall enforce this section in the same manner, by the same means, and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) were incorporated into and made a part of this section.

(B) PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES.—Any person who violates this section shall be subject to the penalties and entitled to the privileges and immunities provided in the Federal Trade Commission Act.

(3) AUTHORITY PRESERVED.—Nothing in this section may be construed to limit the authority of the Commission under any other provision of law.

(c) Definitions.—In this section:

(1) COMMISSION.—The term “Commission” means the Federal Trade Commission.

(2) CONTROLLED BY A FOREIGN ADVERSARY.—The term “controlled by a foreign adversary” means, with respect to an individual or entity, that such individual or entity is—

(A) a foreign person that is domiciled in, is headquartered in, has its principal place of business in, or is organized under the laws of a foreign adversary country;

(B) an entity with respect to which a foreign person or combination of foreign persons described in subparagraph (A) directly or indirectly own at least a 20 percent stake; or

(C) a person subject to the direction or control of a foreign person or entity described in subparagraph (A) or (B).

(3) DATA BROKER.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The term “data broker” means an entity that, for valuable consideration, sells, licenses, rents, trades, transfers, releases, discloses, provides access to, or otherwise makes available data of United States individuals that the entity did not collect directly from such individuals to another entity that is not acting as a service provider.

(B) EXCLUSION.—The term “data broker” does not include an entity to the extent such entity—

(i) is transmitting data of a United States individual, including communications of such an individual, at the request or direction of such individual;

(ii) is providing, maintaining, or offering a product or service with respect to which personally identifiable sensitive data, or access to such data, is not the product or service;

(iii) is reporting or publishing news or information that concerns local, national, or international events or other matters of public interest;

(iv) is reporting, publishing, or otherwise making available news or information that is available to the general public—

(I) including information from—

(aa) a book, magazine, telephone book, or online directory;

(bb) a motion picture;

(cc) a television, internet, or radio program;

(dd) the news media; or

(ee) an internet site that is available to the general public on an unrestricted basis; and

(II) not including an obscene visual depiction (as such term is used in section 1460 of title 18, United States Code); or

(v) is acting as a service provider.

(4) FOREIGN ADVERSARY COUNTRY.—The term “foreign adversary country” means a country specified in section 4872(d)(2) of title 10, United States Code.

(5) PERSONALLY IDENTIFIABLE SENSITIVE DATA.—The term “personally identifiable sensitive data” means any sensitive data that identifies or is linked or reasonably linkable, alone or in combination with other data, to an individual or a device that identifies or is linked or reasonably linkable to an individual.

(6) PRECISE GEOLOCATION INFORMATION.—The term “precise geolocation information” means information that—

(A) is derived from a device or technology of an individual; and

(B) reveals the past or present physical location of an individual or device that identifies or is linked or reasonably linkable to 1 or more individuals, with sufficient precision to identify street level location information of an individual or device or the location of an individual or device within a range of 1,850 feet or less.

(7) SENSITIVE DATA.—The term “sensitive data” includes the following:

(A) A government-issued identifier, such as a Social Security number, passport number, or driver’s license number.

(B) Any information that describes or reveals the past, present, or future physical health, mental health, disability, diagnosis, or healthcare condition or treatment of an individual.

(C) A financial account number, debit card number, credit card number, or information that describes or reveals the income level or bank account balances of an individual.

(D) Biometric information.

(E) Genetic information.

(F) Precise geolocation information.

(G) An individual’s private communications such as voicemails, emails, texts, direct messages, mail, voice communications, and video communications, or information identifying the parties to such communications or pertaining to the transmission of such communications, including telephone numbers called, telephone numbers from which calls were placed, the time calls were made, call duration, and location information of the parties to the call.

(H) Account or device log-in credentials, or security or access codes for an account or device.

(I) Information identifying the sexual behavior of an individual.

(J) Calendar information, address book information, phone or text logs, photos, audio recordings, or videos, maintained for private use by an individual, regardless of whether such information is stored on the individual’s device or is accessible from that device and is backed up in a separate location.

(K) A photograph, film, video recording, or other similar medium that shows the naked or undergarment-clad private area of an individual.

(L) Information revealing the video content requested or selected by an individual.

(M) Information about an individual under the age of 17.

(N) An individual’s race, color, ethnicity, or religion.

(O) Information identifying an individual’s online activities over time and across websites or online services.

(P) Information that reveals the status of an individual as a member of the Armed Forces.

(Q) Any other data that a data broker sells, licenses, rents, trades, transfers, releases, discloses, provides access to, or otherwise makes available to a foreign adversary country, or entity that is controlled by a foreign adversary, for the purpose of identifying the types of data listed in subparagraphs (A) through (P).

(8) SERVICE PROVIDER.—The term “service provider” means an entity that—

(A) collects, processes, or transfers data on behalf of, and at the direction of—

(i) an individual or entity that is not a foreign adversary country or controlled by a foreign adversary; or

(ii) a Federal, State, Tribal, territorial, or local government entity; and

(B) receives data from or on behalf of an individual or entity described in subparagraph (A)(i) or a Federal, State, Tribal, territorial, or local government entity.

(9) UNITED STATES INDIVIDUAL.—The term “United States individual” means a natural person residing in the United States.

(d) Effective Date.—This section shall take effect on the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this division.

If they don’t sell isn’t it a ban?
- They haven't technically been forced to sell either, the bill gives the FTC the authority to act against them. They still have the opportunity to stop sending copious amounts of Data to China, and if they continue then the FTC ruling will give them an ultimatum usually in the form of massive fines. It would be a weird timeline if China just paid the bill and kept spying, lol.
It's always annoyed me that it's been commonly referred to as a ban, when it's actually a forced sale.
- It will be a different product for the consumer, so it's effectively a Tiktok ban in my eyes...
  
  You think all my Palestinian and adjacent Tiktokers will still be in my feed once it's sold?
- It's actually not even that, at least not yet, the bill text just empowers the FTC to do FTC stuff to the company.

This isn't good, now we're only left with the tech giants dictating what people can see.

How is it any different for before the law? TikTok is a tech giant.
- From what I know, certain special interests want TikTok under their control so they can censor certain topics. People keep saying this is happening because of CCP, etc. But I believe they want this platform "censored" before the elections. The other major players already play ball with censorship but TikTok caught them by surprise.
Well we already were. Now we’re just down to American tech giants.
He writes while using Lemmy to see this
- TikTok has 140 million Americans on board.

Seriously doubt it will kill it

At best it'll create another spin-off like the hundreds that already exist on the app/play stores.
- No doubt
- I dont use tiktok, but I might actually download a FossTok just to normalize FOSS for the masses.
It won't, but it will be sold, and the moderation and censorship practices will change.
- Lmao. Sure buddy.
- Ok who's gonna buy it?

This is the best summary I could come up with:

A bill that would force China-based company ByteDance to sell TikTok — or else face a US ban of the platform — is all but certain to become law after the Senate passed a foreign aid package including the measure.

The first time, House lawmakers overwhelmingly voted in favor of the bill when brought as a standalone measure with a shorter divestment timeframe of six months.

“Congress is acting to prevent foreign adversaries from conducting espionage, surveillance, maligned operations, harming vulnerable Americans, our servicemen and women, and our U.S. government personnel.”

They’ve not been in the classified briefings that Congress has held, which have delved more deeply into some of the threats posed by foreign control of TikTok.”

“But what they have seen, beyond even this bill, is Congress’ failure to enact meaningful consumer protections on big tech, and may cynically view this as a diversion, or worse, a concession to U.S. social media platforms,” Warner continued.

“I will sign this bill into law and address the American people as soon as it reaches my desk tomorrow so we can begin sending weapons and equipment to Ukraine this week,” President Biden said in an official statement released shortly after passage in the Senate.

The original article contains 719 words, the summary contains 186 words. Saved 74%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

I honestly don't like tiktok but this is clearly done to censor the pro palestine content and for exposing the US gov along many others as hypocrites

This has been discussed way longer than 10/7/2023.
- What happened on July 10th, 2023?
  
  Obligatory XKCD
- True, I remember talks about it being acquired by a US company but I think this really pushed it over the edge for them
- but curiously now is when it was acted on.
yep. Facebook's still running strong, and that company has been a part of how many fucking genocides now?
Clearly 🙃

If I was Biden and I wanted to make sure absolutely nobody under 35 voted for me, first thing I'd do is genocide.

If that didn't work, then I'd restart student loans.

If that didn't work, I'd ban Tiktok.

Edit: To the people downvoting me: Do you think giving Israel the bombs they use to carry out genocide, restarting student loans, and banning tiktok helps Biden's reelection chances?

Are you republicans who don't want him to change course? Are you democrats perpetually stuck in 2016, blaming voters rather than asking "What policies caused us to lose? What changes do we need to make to win?"

It really doesn’t seem like they want to win
They are the second bit. They've been going hard on saying anyone who won't vote for Biden is actually a bigot who loves Trump and wants a domestic genocide.
noooo not the cringe app! everything but the cringe app

yes, ban on tiktok is a net positive
- Do you think banning tiktok increases or decreases Biden's popularity?
- It's not even a ban, though. TikTok will just be owned by a US company instead of a Singaporean owned company. Literally nothing else will change, I hate to break it to you - cringe app will still be used by millions.
- First they came for TikTok..

I wonder how strange your own public policies must be to accept a situation like this... don't they see the impact this will have on thousands of people who literally need this platform? I don't think so... the American big tech lobby has the loudest voice, right?

Oh god. Don't tell me this is a pro-hamas post. All it is missing is idiots calling everything hasbara or some other buzz word.

China doesn't allow any other apps in their country so why should America allow Chinese apps? America shouldn't keep Chinese malware out of our networks because... ya'll are addicted to TikTok?

This isn't about Palestine. Not everything is hasbara and because of Israel. TikTok isn't the voice of freedom or reason. Ya'll just brainwashed by Chinese algorithms designed to upset the user base. The algorithm is doing what it is supposed to do: create division.

Edit: spelling

No this post actually is Hamas. Please tell Israel quickly
- BREAKING: Israel dronestrikes lemmy.world servers, points to potential Hamas base inside storage drives
I agree with you. The CCP classifies recommendation algorithms in a category similar to defense secrets. It isn't just Tiktok that can't be sold to non-Chinese, it is all recommendation algorithms. They know damn well what effect these algorithms have on a population.

Something we can all agree on at least I would think

The government telling us which social media platforms we're allowed to use? No I don't think we agree and I don't even use TikTok.
- That's kind of how I feel about it. Don't use it (or any other social media actually) but if the government is unwilling to shut down hate platforms like truth social then they really shouldn't meddle with something like tiktok that's mostly just kids being dumb.
Nope. Guess again.