this post was submitted on 07 May 2024
614 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

59559 readers
3710 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] r0ertel@lemmy.world 27 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I read somewhere that the thought that you can vote with your dollars makes you feel good and empowered to make choices, but is overshadowed by the fact that doing so means that whomever has more dollars has more votes.

Regarding Congress, I was really hoping that this big fear of TicTok would result in some sort of GDPR type laws which empower the individuals to take control of our personal data, which could also be used to prevent our personal data from being used against us by foreign countries.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

You made the mistake of believing TikTok was anything more than a paid hit by other Social Media corporations.

[–] r0ertel@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

You're saying that it was a threat to the incumbents who then sent their lobbyists to demand a ban in the name of national security? It's plausible.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'd be pretty confident that it's not. There have been lots of companies that show up in the space, and they haven't been clobbered by other companies via the regulatory process. Those haven't been owned out of China. Those companies aren't gonna care about the ownership of a competitor.

And the US went to extreme measures to ensure that China didn't control 5G infrastructure via Huawei, considered it security-critical, and the competitors there are out of Europe, Ericsson and Nokia. And the US did some local restrictions on Huawei phones (and two other state-owned Chinese phone companies) being sold to military members at bases, but not on other Chinese competitors.

And there are a number of prior restrictions that the US has placed on companies owned out of China company. For example, I know at one point a Chinese holding company bought a solar farm directly overlooking a US naval weapons testing facility and the US mandated that the owners divest.

Like, agree with them or not, I think that it's pretty safe to say that the US government has very real security concerns specifically about Chinese companies.

I mean, I can believe that Google is probably enthusiastic (is "Youtube Shorts" the closest equivalent? Maybe there's someone else who does similar things), but I don't buy that Google fabricated this. If that were the case, you'd expect to see a bunch of prior China-related restrictions, but would expect to see a lot of Google-related restrictions, but what one actually sees is the opposite.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

So you think personal use carries the same weight as critical infrastructure? The government has a legitimate interest in protecting the power grid and Internet back bone. It does not have a legitimate interest in telling me what I can put on my personal devices.