330
submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

Close to half of American adults favor TikTok ban, Reuters/Ipsos poll shows::Close to half of American adults support a ban on the Chinese-owned social media app TikTok, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos survey that also asked questions about national security concerns and China.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FlickOfTheBean@lemmy.world 47 points 1 year ago

Hmm can someone tell me if I'm just in a "republicans are hysteric about it so it must not be that bad" mindset?

It's obviously spyware to some degree, but this really seems more like a case of red-scare. I can't put my finger on exactly why, though. Makes me think I might just be reacting to their reaction.

I guess, what exactly are they afraid that China is going to do with this data? It's a missing puzzle piece that I've heard nothing coherent on besides "China gonna spy on muh datas". Like, sure, maybe if you're a government official, and I don't think bans of tiktok on government devices are stupid, but I think the nationwide ban idea is pretty dumb and baseless. So I guess my actual question is, what are they afraid of happening, exactly?

[-] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

I look at it as completely missing the root problem, which is companies have way too much power to harvest and hoard data. If there were strong data ownership and protection laws in the US TikTok would either follow those rules or be fined/banned for actual cause. Washington is just mad a company not in US jurisdiction is the one doing the harvesting for once.

[-] FlickOfTheBean@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

I don't disagree with that which is why I'm currently in the "this is red-scare" camp. If Washington (more specifically, the NSA and friends) hadn't been buying our data to peruse via the lax privacy laws we currently have, maybe they'd have a leg to stand on with any of this...

[-] sjm@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

I agree, and I always want to know what TikTok is taking that facebook, twitter, etc aren't also taking

[-] CanofBeanz@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

The exact same shit, it's just what continent it's stored on.

[-] Kinglink@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Ask yourself if the American government had the ability to talk directly to the Russian populace with no interference from their government, what might they say/do/cause to happen.

That's what Tiktok is, and that's what a lot of the fear is about. It's know that all Chinese companies have heavy connections to the government, so if they wanted to do something they could.

Not even saying Tiktok is that bad, mostly just saying Americans, especially the government is a bunch of fucking hypocrites about this shit.

Honestly, keep it to "If you don't like it don't use it" and leave it at that. The idea of the government picking what social network people are allowed on seems foolish, and I imagine many people will side load the app (At least on Android) if it's officially banned.

[-] FlickOfTheBean@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Unfortunately I literally can't imagine anything convincing coming out of the US's mouth given that case. It's not like we can Manchurian candidate sleeper cells in Russia using our influence, and I'd argue China also has similar limitations.

The worst I can imagine is "us bad" with a lot of easily disprovable half truths that only stand for idiots who believe whatever tiktok gives them. And if the politicians who support this ban are arguing that most Americans are like that, then they'd better be pushing for better education or else they are also nefarious (because why else would they want people to be susceptible to propaganda, but not XYZ's propaganda?)

I guess maybe my issue now is that it almost seems that republicans are trying to do their own propaganda machine, but are incensed that China might be stealing morons who are, as another commenter put it, ripe for radicalization. But that doesn't seem right because I'd be surprised if they didn't also have a bunch of outreach shit through tiktok.... Idk, this is already delving into conspiracy theory territory so I'm gonna just stop myself here.

But all in all, I totally agree with your last paragraph, especially "if you don't like it, then don't use it".

[-] FireTower@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

They don't need to be particularly convincing points, their targets are teenagers. They just need to be at a frequency that their viewer accepts them to be the 'common' point of view.

[-] yossarian@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago
[-] FlickOfTheBean@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Well I mean, that does make sense. I still believe tiktok [https://youtu.be/Ti8v4eL8oIE](really is a bit of spyware) (sorry for the longish YouTube video) but that could definitely be a contributing factor to this case

[-] bdiddy@lemmy.one 3 points 1 year ago

google is also spyware.. so is facebook while we're at it and literally ANY OTHER APP YOU PUT ON YOUR PHONE. Ever notice how every single thing has an app? It's not to make it easy for you to buy stuff from them, it's so they can utilize your data to make them more money.

[-] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 1 year ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/Ti8v4eL8oIE

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source, check me out at GitHub.

[-] ERPAdvocate@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

I might be a little paranoid here so feel free to lmk, but a few uses for the data gathered by a foreign government/keeping people addicted:

The most obvious: Propaganda to push people to distrust their government

The less reasonable but still possible: Time wasting, people spend less time trying new things due to the lack of instant gratification, decreasing productivity/capability of the users. We've seen China begin to address this domestically with new laws limiting usage, what the US would consider overreach (unless it effects the bottom line perhaps?)

The downright unreasonable: Profile building using accounts as a digital fingerprint to determine military capability, it's amazing what people will advertise about themselves online, TikTok occasionally tells people what illness (mental or physical) before even they are formally diagnosed. Imagine leveraging that information in a 'unethical' way, the possibilities are endless.

[-] FlickOfTheBean@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I think the paranoia is what I was looking for, so thank you for delivering!

For the most obvious: idk, I think people should generally have a healthy distrust of those in government positions. Maybe ideally not, but in reality, it's necessary to not be taken advantage of by any manner of power hungry people. If tiktok half truths inspire someone to start actually looking at what xyz government has done, then that's a win in my book. If they just eat the half truths as is straight from tiktok, that's when there's a problem, but that's what my "why don't they educate people on how to spot propaganda" is to address.

Less reasonable: I think people should be allowed to do what they want to do long as it doesn't infringe on the health and safety of another. I guess you can split hairs about it decreasing health due to people working out less or something like that, but I don't think that's a good enough reason for government action.

Unreasonable: this actually seems the most reasonable to me, believe it or not. Military people posting the wrong thing at the wrong time from even a personal account can and has had bad effects on security before. That's why I would support a ban of any spyware-like app on government devices and on military bases (this was originally only support for a ban on gov devices, but I think if we're thinking about security, banning it in places where leaks may cost lives makes sense)

As for the endless possibilities of leveraging mental illness knowledge of a user, I'm afraid I can't imagine what one could do. The only time I can imagine that would really matter is if China takes over the US and goes full genocide on the population. I think the world would go down in nuclear flames before that would happen though...

[-] galloog1@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If the app was literally called "CCP Government Monitor and Sensor Node" would you say the same thing about people being free to use it how they please? At the very least you would recommend any phone with it installed be banned from any government location or strategic location and people who use it scrutinized. As it currently stands, people don't believe that's what it is because they like it.

If you accept what the government is trying to communicate about it, the lines around individual freedom and the freedom to endanger others becomes pretty clear. You have the freedoms to work with explosives but you have no right to take a bomb on a military base. It is the same with data models. Having worked in machine learning and defense, I'm inclined to believe it. I acknowledge that I'm biased here but take my opinion for what it's worth.

[-] FlickOfTheBean@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I would say malicious malware shouldn't be sold on the app store and that anyone who hosts it should suffer whatever fallout it comes with (not the end users, the apk providers). However, due to the US being The Way That It Is™, we don't actually have any recourse like that for providers of malware. As for spyware.... I guess it probably should be handled like malware too. Eh you got me lol

I've said a couple different places in this thread I support a ban of tiktok on government phones and in at least one other place I support a ban of it on military bases, but my main issue was that I couldn't figure out how it could be used for nefarious purposes outside of government phones or areas.

As for "you have the right to work with the data models, but not remove the data from US soil", that's a new one, I'll have to think about that some more. Good point though, I think.

[-] Bucket_of_Truth@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

They could just ban the manner of data collection that TikTok does, but that would affect all the US social media apps too.

[-] Bye@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I think it’s bad because of how addictive it is

I had it for two days and I spent over 36 hours on the app.

Im sure some people are less affected by it than I was, but from my perspective, it’s too dangerous to let live.

Also I like the idea of getting rid of dangerous things and I don’t believe in free speech absolutism; I think we take that idea too far

[-] treadful@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 year ago

I had it for two days and I spent over 36 hours on the app.

So that justifies the federal government stepping in to save you from yourself? Should we have a War on Algorithms next? War on drugs has been going swimmingly.

[-] Bye@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Yes I think we should

It’s not just me, there are tons of people who are susceptible to schemes like social media etc. it’s why we don’t let kids smoke and they shouldn’t vape nicotine either. It’s why we regulate gambling, and why we should regulate sugary drinks too.

We didn’t evolve for a world with instant satisfaction, and we can’t cope with it.

[-] treadful@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago

we don’t let kids smoke and they shouldn’t vape nicotine either.

To be clear, we don't ban children from consuming these products. We ban the sale of nicotine products to children. By anyone. The federal government didn't come in and ban Marlboro.

It’s why we regulate gambling, and why we should regulate sugary drinks too.

Regulations creating rules of behavior that apply to all actors. Not just making a law saying people aren't allowed inside the Bellagio.

The difference is super important. Laws need to be applied equally.

[-] FlickOfTheBean@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I can't disagree with an opinion like that coupled with an anecdote like that.

I disagree that it's the federal government who should be stepping in to limit screen time though.

In fact, tiktok is the only app I've seen that has a "why don't you go touch grass" timer, so in that regard, it's got less nefarious design patterns than, say, Facebook.

I don't think I understand what you mean by dangerous in this context, honestly. When I think danger, I think of bodily harm. What does your definition of dangerous entail when it comes to social media apps that physically can't cause harm? Is my understanding of danger too simplistic?

this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
330 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

59017 readers
2641 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS