Is it usual for a company to give out any statement when a potential acquisition does not happen?
Edit: see for example Art. 17 of the EU market abuse regulation.
Does anyone seriously believe TikTok is a threat to national security?
> combatting disinformation
There you have it. I've seen TikTok videos go viral being really critical of the US government including its foreign policy. The kind of video that would just be invisible or outright banned from Youtube or Facebook video. That's why they want to get rid of it.
I have no thoughts on if they are a threat right now, but I think they are a very interesting and possibly powerful piece on the board for the future.
Everyone who believes Facebook was used to influence the 2016 election should believe TikTok poses a similar threat. I'd agree that the threat is overblown, but many serious people, in good faith, seriously believe it.
[1]: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/china-election-interference...
While FB's perceived threat was(is?) targeting of users on behavioral models, for misinformation campaigns. Tiktok's goes beyond this, with a state actor pushing its propaganda with active blessing of the platform itself and curbing dissent against itself. Considering how we have seen companies self censor for CCP, I wouldn't say the curbing dissent thing is far fetched.
On a similar note, I used to consider SCMP reporting of high standard different from Xinhua/CGTN and free from interference as it was based in HK. But lately I have seen them publish stories to push CCP agenda without proper fact checking.
The US views Chinese social media apps as being able to spread criticism (and most likely propaganda) and the US can’t do likewise in China, so they’ll just not let Chinese social media companies operate in the US until that changes.
There will be 0 official, influential Chinese social media companies operating in the US on a permanent basis until the CCP let’s US social media companies operate in China. This has bipartisan support.
"All buildings matter" and "all days in September matter" are just two recent memes from the past month.
TikTok is doing a lot of harm to our national image. Zoomers that I know don't think it's important for the US to have a lead in tech and that we commit atrocities worse than China.
It's pretty alarming that we're being manipulated whereas China and Russia are impenetrable.
Social media in the hands of state actors may be one of the greatest dangers to democracy yet.
It’s not so much that you actually are right, but that you’re exposing a contrarian idea that doesn’t align with either CCP apologists or certain leftists in the US, so they’ll try to silence comments like yours (and mine) to make it appear that they aren’t popular or worth discussing.
(you’ll see a subsequent increase in downvotes for me too for expressing interest).
What do you think these mean? I'm confused at how you would read those words and think that it has anything to do with "national image".
And we haven't? You could look at race relations, organized labor, communist party. Any of these, and more, could be looked at internally historically to the usa and show hypocritical views.
A significant number of my fellow American, Millennial friends want to see China overtake us in all areas including economic and military.
Partly because they believe we need to be punished, and partly because it shocks boomers.
Then why force them to sell to a US company specifically. Why wasn't Germany or any EU company with strong privacy laws allowed to buy them?
There is no one outside the US with both the tech skills and the cash to buy something the size of TikTok. Heck, there are very few in the US (adding the third requirement of no antitrust concerns).
If TikTok were a Canadian, British, French, German, Korean, Japanese, or Taiwanese company, the US government wouldn't have intervened in the first place.
But naturally they don’t want to offend China so why take the risk when you can try to play both sides as long as possible?
I think they are in the sense that they're collecting massive amounts of user data about their users and I believe they wouldn't hesitate to share that data with the Chinese government if asked.
On the flip side, I also think their threat to our national security is being made a bigger deal than it actually is by politicians who have an anti-Chinese agenda and companies who see an easy way to cripple a competitor.
Though I say that as someone who has never used the app, and I'm not sure about other data concerns besides blackmail (maybe troop deployments?)
- I'm sure it collecting location data. In the past people have used data from apps like Strava to actually trace and map the layouts of military bases, so I'm sure you could do something similar.
- I believe the app has messaging as well which could contain private or sensitive data
- In that same vein, I know plenty of people who send things through snapchat and instagram that they definitely shouldn't (think military members taking pictures on base where they shouldn't to try and impress people or devs taking pictures in meetings with sensitive data in the background)
- You could use the app to sow discontent or push propaganda by showing or hiding certain content to certain locations or social groups
- You might (BIG MAYBE) be able to track certain high profile through the location data of their friends or family or running facial recognition on all videos
Some of the things I listed may not be feasible and I'm sure there are things you could do with the data is not listed. The things I listed aren't meant to be concrete examples that I'm saying we should worry about, but rather examples of ways that the data they have can be used in unexpected ways.
I don't have enough information to know whether it's a threat, but yes, I think it's reasonable to be concerned.
Videos such as? Seems to me that the kind of videos banned on Youtube, Twitter or Facebook aren't really the ones that are really critical of the US government, especially the executive branch.
https://www.tiktok.com/@jperkinsauthor/video/686526224212490...
I think the US has more than a few skeletons in its closet that they'd prefer remain there, so having a means of exerting control over popular platforms seems like plain old common sense.
Do you have any evidence of this happening? I've never heard of pro-US censorship before on any of these platforms (or any social media platform..)
[1]: ask your nieces, daughters, or young female friends, about their experience if they ever set their Instagram or tiktok to public.
What critique of the US government would be banned on those platforms?
It's quite obvious since the CCP has control of it. I'd question anyone who doesn't seriously believe that the CCP is waiting for the right moment to exploit the information from TikTok and similar apps, if it isn't already.
Name one.
It’s also been speculated that TikTok is using the data they get from the US to train their facial recognition and AI tools better.
This deceit was the fundamental legal premise of the forced sale.
Of course it's bullshit. But even though it failed to win, Microsoft was a willing and active participant in the bullshit from day one, and can’t really call the game out now without acknowledging it's willful collaboration in the deceit when it held the potential for profit.
Plus, it would anger the petulant and corrupt executive who they are currently counting on favoring them and opposing Google in other executive actions, and they don't want to risk losing favor on that.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/sep/25/revealed-...
I wonder if this is Microsoft's way of saying, "It still won't be safe under Oracle".
I.e., US govt doesn't want a popular social network that is not under its control.
~~https://twitter.com/verge/status/1305285085722292224~~
Right link: https://twitter.com/business/status/1305179144171421708
Edit: "Oracle Wins Bidding for TikTok in U.S., After Microsoft Proposal Rejected" https://www.wsj.com/articles/microsoft-drops-out-of-bidding-...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/microsoft-drops-out-of-bidding-...
the US sanctioned Japan when it threatened its economic dominance too.
Why is the UK working on a deal? Shouldn’t the EU provide the same deal to all countries? Nah. It’s “tit-for-tat”.
That’s not a general principle of which I’m aware. Plenty of countries have rules like “we treat you how you treat us”. Nothing about that is inherently incompatible with the rule of law.
