this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2024
105 points (88.3% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2539 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 53 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

Quick outline of why TikTok is so uniquely dangerous:

  1. The Chinese government treats communication networks as their personal hoovering-attachment for any data they might want. Companies are required by law to operate as an arm of Chinese intelligence, both in terms of giving information and in terms of manipulating what information people on their network are allowed to see.
  2. It's not just your TikTok data. It's photos and files on your phone, your contacts, your messages, basically anything that the app with its too-permissive permissions can get its hands on, can potentially go up to Chinese intelligence.
  3. TikTok is not structured like any other app. It has features like custom-downloading and running arbitrary binaries from its central server that honestly don't even make much sense except as spying apparatus (consistent with #1).
  4. What China might do with this unprecedented level of access to everyone's phones is malevolent in a different way than, say, Facebook's access to everyone's data. Like Facebook they have the ability to e.g. influence an election, but they also have the ability to try to blackmail an individual to compromise them, or do for-real torture in the real world (say by tracking down a dissident via TikTok spying and then having one of their little Chinese-police-in-America units grab them).

Basically I don't think any government should have that kind of access to access people's private communications or design the algorithms that dictate people's social media experience, but definitely not China's in particular.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 47 points 8 months ago (4 children)

The only valid criticism to this move I've seen and actually agree with is that instead of banning individual companies, the US should enact legislation that makes these practices illegal.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 17 points 8 months ago

NSA raises its hand

"No we would prefer that you didn't"

(I mean, honestly, it's a good point. Making a company-neutral law would be a better approach for 3 or 4 different big reasons.)

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 16 points 8 months ago

Which would, of course, make Facebook illegal as well, and LinkedIn... and pretty much all of Alphabet.

... and that sounds fine to me.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 5 points 8 months ago

yeah but then they would have to ban facebook and instagram too.

they do all of these if you replace 'china' with 'united states'

[–] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The most baffling thing to me about that whole "data buying scandal" is that the government was PAYING for it and not just seizing it saying "yeah you're giving us that, here's a gag order so you cant talk about it"

[–] ikilledlaurapalmer@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Sources on any of this? Perhaps it works differently on Android.

The main thing which you miss though is that it has “the algorithm” down pat. While it knows I’ll watch cooking videos and videos of people yelling at cops, it doesn’t bother trying to show me things about Trump, etc. it is keeping me in my own custom echo chamber. I have no idea how it works so well.

Now imagine someone hell bent on believing things like the pizza molester stories or Jan 6th alt histories. This is a very effective tool for radicalizing people and reinforcing the “truth” they already suspect. It’s easier to divide people based on preconceived notions than trying to convince people of something new.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] ikilledlaurapalmer@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

While I agree that the fingerprinting data is interesting, on iOS, TikTok doesn’t require any of those permissions as indicated. Some of the articles state that they are required, but they aren’t. As far as I know it isn’t possible, without a zero day of some sort, to access camera, sound, contacts, etc without explicitly granting those permissions.

That said, that is a lot of data, and for those that can be linked back to an individual. And I’m sure most people are less careful with permissions. The fingerprinting data is clearly powerful, and I find it extremely fascinating, since there is VERY limited input and such effective output.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I don’t believe 3 is possible on iOS? Arbitrary code execution is something Apple explicitly disallows on the App Store. While some apps sneak through, something as large as TikTok likely wouldn’t survive long with blatant rule breaking.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 2 points 8 months ago

The time I saw it, the researcher said specifically that they'd observed it on Android. Whether that means that that feature of TikTok is only an Android thing because of the feature you're talking about, I don't know, but that would make some kind of sense yes.

[–] Suavevillain@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Something about Tik-Tok has them shook.

[–] SmilingSolaris@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They can't control it. Simple as. Everyone talking about spying is silly if they think that would change under a different ownership. Spying is going to happen either way, I'll take the spy that can do less to me.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Yeah, I support banning it but the whole "either sell it or get banned" does have me wondering if they are doing the right thing for the wrong reason here. Or even the wrong thing for the wrong reason, if they intend to just keep it going under new management that isn't the CCP.

[–] GladiusB@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

And the fact they Chinese government refuses to Censor pro Palestinian voices. And other topics western media pertinently censors.

This is what was on TikTok while Twitter was full with #istandwithisrael: https://www.tiktok.com/@rathbonemakesmusic/video/7289906736847129902

[–] Binzy_Boi@supermeter.social 7 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

Still with this? Is there anything that they're doing differently from other social media corps based in the US? The user data gets sold regardless.

[–] FoxBJK@midwest.social 22 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The thing they’re doing differently is being owned by a Chinese company. If TikTok was simply a US based social media corp, no one would care.

[–] Heavybell@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago

Not like everyone is happy about the US doing this, but at least the US is theoretically our ally…

[–] ClydapusGotwald@lemmy.world 18 points 8 months ago

The difference is china = bad. They don’t give a rats ass if a company in America sells your data cause that’s cool.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 months ago

Yea, they're struggling to get their suicide numbers up as high as Instagram. America demands nothing short of the best so we take deep pride in Zuckerberg's accomplishment

[–] PoliticallyIncorrect@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

Biden it's dumb AF and completely a joke.

[–] anticurrent@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I really hope that ban will take effect before the elections, then you will see both parties scrambling to retract the legislation after enormous backlash.

[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I feel like the Democratic party is the only one who will feel backlash from this, the typical TikTok-er doesn't lean Republican I don't think (well, other than creepy old dudes who get way too into videos of teenage girls dancing)