Young Democrats sound the alarm about banning TikTok before the election

[Gunny]

If Tik Tok has that much influence on voters, look no further for the problem I haven't seen a level of stupidity "influencers" won't stoop. If this is where people get their politics, they probably should hand in their voter's registration cards.

Young Democrats sound the alarm about banning TikTok before the election - POLITICO

[SassyLady]

Well ... a lot of young people currently get their political ideology from late night tv talk show hosts like Kimmel, et al. How stupid is that?

[revelarts]

Sad thing here is that this is another one of those "alex jones", "canary in a coal mine" free speech issues.
Once they say it's legal to ban tik tok that opens the door for the gov't to have more control over who has access to provide content to the internet & gives the the govt the freedom to censors anyone that falls into whatever broad "legal" category of "dangerous" they carve out here. And creates the "legal" beachhead for ANY new restrictions to come against individuals, groups nations, & corporations.

(maybe if I talk about how badly this will effect corporations. How Big business will be extremely controlled by the gov't, then some folks will be really concerned. Since that interferes with 'free trade' and not just personal freedom which many seem ok giving up if the gov't says they'll be safer and it doesn't really effect them personally. While The FULL RANGE of economic rights & freedom is primary to life & health of the economy and for good gov't and must be promoted legally in it's most extreme form. Or else's it's... Socialism and the end of the world.
But individual rights & freedom that's just optional fantasy stuff. it's a fine idea... if you can defend it... good luck with that. plus people can't handle to much freedom.)



"It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties.
The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise,and entangled the question in precedents.
James Madison

[fj1200]

Sad thing here is that this is another one of those "alex jones", "canary in a coal mine" free speech issues.
Once they say it's legal to ban tik tok that opens the door for the gov't to have more control over who has access to provide content to the internet & gives the the govt the freedom to censors anyone that falls into whatever broad "legal" category of "dangerous" they carve out here. And creates the "legal" beachhead for ANY new restrictions to come against individuals, groups nations, & corporations.

(maybe if I talk about how badly this will effect corporations. How Big business will be extremely controlled by the gov't, then some folks will be really concerned. Since that interferes with 'free trade' and not just personal freedom which many seem ok giving up if the gov't says they'll be safer and it doesn't really effect them personally. While The FULL RANGE of economic rights & freedom is primary to life & health of the economy and for good gov't and must be promoted legally in it's most extreme form. Or else's it's... Socialism and the end of the world.
But individual rights & freedom that's just optional fantasy stuff. it's a fine idea... if you can defend it... good luck with that. plus people can't handle to much freedom.)



"It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties.
The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise,and entangled the question in precedents.
James Madison

The "banning" of tiktok is a national security issue the same as not allowing Huawei. IIRC the question is ban or divest and divestment is not a ban at all. No canary here.

[Kathianne]

The "banning" of tiktok is a national security issue the same as not allowing Huawei. IIRC the question is ban or divest and divestment is not a ban at all. No canary here.

I agree on security issue, I also understand that the way it's written extraordinary powers are going to Executive. It needs work before passing.

[revelarts]

Rep Thomas Massie
@RepThomasMassie
"The so-called TikTok ban is a trojan horse.

The President will be given the power to ban WEB SITES, not just Apps.
The person breaking the new law is deemed to be the U.S. (or offshore) INTERNET HOSTING SERVICE or App Store, not the “foreign adversary.”

"If you think this isn’t a Trojan horse and will only apply to TikTok and foreign-adversary social media companies, then contemplate why someone thought it was important to get a very specific exclusion for their internet based business written into the bill:"



https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek...%20Updated.pdf











- But Hey..
i'm sure it will only be used for safety just like the "Patriot Act"
Beleive them if you want to ... AGAIN. and then Blame the left when any president uses it in a way you you don't like.
even though representative Massie & others are telling us TODAY that it WILL be used in the way it's written not in any real way to "protect" America.
How can we fall for the this BS over and over again. Spying & Censorship "keeps us safe"?.... I guess freedom is worthless if tiktok is on your phone, it might kill you or worse.

[revelarts]

[revelarts]

"So, what exactly is a “foreign threat?”
That is a good question. And how would the secretary mitigate it in the context of a platform like TikTok? That is another good question. The answer to both of these questions is the same: whatever the Secretary of Commerce arbitrarily decides"


...
"As Greg Price explained on X, the RESTRICT Act is basically just the PATRIOT Act, for those who lived through 9/11, but for the internet.

“It gives the government the ability to go after anyone they deem as a national security risk at which point they can access everything from their computer to video games to their Ring light,” Price warns.

“Believe it or not, it gets even worse: If you [sic] find you in violation, they can put you in jail for 20 years, fine you $1M, and seize your property … They can also deem any foreign government an adversary without informing congress [sic] and everything they do is not subjected to FOIA.”

In other words, Republicans in Congress are trying to pass what amounts to a Stasi Act right here in the United States because they simply cannot stand the fact that TikTok is allowed to exist and be used in this country.

What is worse, the Biden regime is in full agreement with the proposition of a RESTRICT Act, stating that it is “very in favor” of its passage. This just goes to show that right and left are just two wings on the same bird.

“Republicans, mindlessly seeking a big win against China and tech, now that both are popular punching bags, nearly sleepwalked into passing a disastrous law,” warns Revolver.

“The RESTRICT Act is a classic D.C. ploy. Savvy operators, exploiting the right’s well-intentioned desire to combat China, offered them a temporary victory to lure them into a permanent long-term calamity.”

Neither side of the political aisle can be trusted anymore to protect our free speech rights. Find out more at FirstAmendment.news."

[Gunny]

I agree on security issue, I also understand that the way it's written extraordinary powers are going to Executive. It needs work before passing.

Look a LOT like Patriot Act Part Deux to me. I'm all for shutting down Tik Tok. I'm not for giving the US Government this authority. I would suggest putting it through Congress on a case-by-case would be a better route than giving the Executive even more power to misuse.

The President already has the authority to declare an emergency and shut anything down should an immediate resolution be needed. Segue into I'm for taking stuff away that the Exec has and shouldn't.

[revelarts]

TIKTOK THREAT IS PURELY HYPOTHETICAL, U.S. INTELLIGENCE ADMITS
“We have nothing to add,”
the FBI said, when asked for evidence of TikTok’s actual threat.
https://theintercept.com/2024/03/16/...curity-threat/

...The lack of evidence is not for lack of trying, as Wray alluded to during the same hearing. When asked by Harshbarger what is being done to investigate the Chinese government’s involvement in TikTok, Wray replied that he would see whether “any specific investigative work … could be incorporated into the classified briefing I referred to.”

The FBI, when asked by The Intercept if it has any evidence that TikTok has coordinated with the Chinese government, referred to Wray’s prior statements — many of which are quoted in this article. “We have nothing to add to the Director’s comments,” an FBI spokesperson said.

The fiscal year 2025 FBI budget request to Congress, which outlines its resource priorities in the coming year, was unveiled this week but makes no mention of TikTok in its 94 pages. In fact, it makes no mention of China whatsoever.

Since at least 2020, the interagency Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States has investigated the implications of ByteDance’s acquisition of TikTok. The investigation followed an executive order by former President Donald Trump that sought to force TikTok to divest from its parent company. When that investigation failed to force a sale, a frustrated Congress decided to get involved, with the House passing legislation on Wednesday that would force ByteDance to sell TikTok.

In testimony to the House Intelligence Committee on Tuesday, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines, the highest-ranking intelligence official in the U.S. government, was asked about the possibility that China might use TikTok to influence the upcoming 2024 presidential elections. Haines said only that it could not be discounted.

“We cannot rule out that the CCP could use it,” Haines said....

Could China use tik tok? yes. Are they? probably.. just like everyone else in the world with the capability to access it and the rest of the internet overtly & covertly.

It's another "patriot act" gov't control grab. using "safety" as the same old overused but reliable excuse to take away our imaginary freedoms.
BTW If our freedoms are so imaginary why do they keep making new laws and edicts to limit them?
the U.S. gov't is the danger here.

[fj1200]

^Are they correct in banning Huawei?

[Gunny]

^Are they correct in banning Huawei?

When National security interferes with individual liberty, screw the country. When the Nation's gone so JoeBob can be an idiot online, there won't be a problem because the liberties will go with the Nation.

Regardless that point, I am very concerned with online content having 5 children running about the house. They don't call those idiots "influencers" without reason.

[revelarts]

^Are they correct in banning Huawei?

I think there are a LOT of solutions that need to be implemented to deal with all the tech corps..
Banning isn't my 1st choice.

•Protected but 100% Open source code & open hardware on all communication devices sold in the US..
•If gov'ts are concerned about using foreign tech, then have it all made in country or even govt facilities.
•Make mandatorially optional -
---peer to peer HIGH encryption on all devices,
---lock out location on all devices,
---VPN on all devices.
•criminal fines & or block to domestic commerce for capturing or selling info not explicitly allowed.
•Opt-IN to all info/data sharing instead of opt-OUT.
•"Terms of use" turned to protect ALL consumer info rather than blackmail for product use.
•probably break-up major tech corps U.S..
•Incentivize smaller U.S. startups.
•Promote research in short range local networks

I'm no tech guy but there's probably a lot more that could be done to protect EVERYONE's privacy.

Once on my job I met a guy who was working for a major military contractor. He told me there are ways they protect info transfers. especially when communicating over seas. He said Israel is extreme in it's methods.

But I'm not sure what info the gov't thinks is going out over random Huawei phones.

But still, with all this supposed ubiquitous ability to spy on devices, networks and the internet there's still all these cild s*x abusers, video & pic all over. No "bans" on that or those who promote it.
but TikTok & Huawei!! can't have that.

[revelarts]

Facebook let Netflix see user DMs to help them tailor content as part of a close collaboration between the two tech giants, new court documents claims
•Facebook shared user DMs with Netflix 'for nearly a decade', a lawsuit claims
•Facebook and Netflix had a 'special relationship'
•Netflix's chairman Reed Hastings was also on the board of Facebook

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...r-content.html

for 100 million dollars some stories say

But hey TikTok might be stealing info!!!