Which means that all countries other than the US also should be banning Facebook, and most US companies. As Snowden showed, most of them have a history of wire fraud.
https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/ban-on-facebo...
https://news.yahoo.com/facebook-instagram-face-europe-ban-16...
If Facebook kept EU data subject data in the EU, or even if they use Standard Contractual Clauses to transfer it to different third countries without the same kind of problematic surveillance laws that the US has, there would be no issue.
We would be doing the same of course if we were not much weaker and if our products were actually used over there.
Also, don't be one sided on this. The EU countries also spy on the US.
In case you hadn't heard (I presume you have, us being on HN and all), there is some movement within the EU towards that end
Facebook threatening to close their site in Europe because of regulations is not the same as EU banning them.
https://blog.simpleanalytics.com/eu-moving-closer-to-faceboo...
I dunno, "stopping data transfer" sounds like a ban by another name to me.
> Which means that all countries other than the US also should be banning Facebook, and most US companies.
Like many sibling comments have already pointed out, many do.
But the answer to your statement is "no." You're trying to pull an oversimple rule out of a pithy comment and neglecting other important distinctions. It's not just a black/white distinction like foreign country vs. domestic, but more more nuanced one like enemy country vs adversary country vs neutral country vs allied country vs domestic. The answer to the question "should country X ban Facebook for national security reasons" will be different for different countries based on their context.
If you assume equivalence between (1) Facebook and Tiktok and (2) the U.S. and China's data collection practices.
And I don't think those are equivalent, and therefore it's not necessary to treat the dissimilar cases the same.
