The Trump administration forces a Tiktok ban unless it is sold to a US corporation citing "security concerns". Now they want a cut of the sale.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-04/tiktok-sale-to-micros…
So much for "land of the free" and an "open economy". Seems to only apply if you are on the same side as USA Inc.
Fifty one cents.
tree fiddy final offer.
It was about this time that I noticed Baebs was about 500 feet tall and from the paleolithic era.
So much for "land of the free" and an "open economy". Seems to only apply if you are on the same side as USA Inc.
It's been like that since their inception, man
I wonder how long until Trump realises America isn't a business and you can't ask for kickbacks for facilitating sales.
Trump doesn't know what his job is.
watching even a minute of his interviews is just infuriating, he doesn't know how to address the questions, he just jumps off into false assertions, and a bunch of "believe me!", "believe me!"
Pity they weren't going to pre-record it, then chop & change the footage to make him look good like on The Apprentice.
Scott Morison isn't any different either, what he sees, he tries to turn a profit. He's a businessman….or so I'm told…
Good.
There are very valid reasons why TikTok should be banned in the US (and any Western nation). A sale to Microsoft would change that.
Please elaborate. So the "security concerns" suddenly magically disappear after selling it to Microsoft? Lol
If you are oblivious to concerns over TikTok then I suspect people can safely assume the motivations behind your posts on this topic. But, yes, if Microsoft does buy TikTok then the security concerns of the Chinese government having access to the personal data that TikTok harvests (including the content of your clipboard) would disappear in time.
@mrvaluepack: Nothing I am saying is casting any judgement, discriminatory or otherwise, upon anyone on the basis of race or ethnicity. I am talking purely about objective facts, nothing subjective.
Frankly trivialising racism like this is pathetic.
I don't know who you are trying to impress with this childish routine.
But to indulge you, yes I obviously would prefer to transparently volunteer data as per a standard user-agreement with a US company than have the Chinese government harvest private information which is not needed for the app to function and is collected for another purpose. I wouldn't volunteer that information to any government anywhere in the world.
Your claim that Microsoft would continue to do this is simply not true.
@[Deactivated]: If a Western or Northern European country came up with TikTok instead and had the same privacy data concerns. I bet you wouldn't have the same opinion as you have elaborated above.
That is called racial discrimination - Individuals can discriminate by refusing to do business with, socialize with, or share resources with people of a certain group. Also, having a negative prejudicial view of products and services from a particular country sort of fits into that category.
You are the childish one calling people childish when there hasnt been any concrete evidence about this. You haven't referenced one source from an IT security expert on why TikTok should be banned.
How would you know what Microsoft would do?
@mrvaluepack: I close with "I wouldn't volunteer that information to any government anywhere in the world."
You open with a canned response of "if a Western or Northern European country came up with TikTok instead and had the same privacy data concerns. I bet you wouldn't have the same opinion as you have elaborated above."
Enterprise in the west is autonomous, that is the nature of the East/West divide, and Western enterprise is not mandated by their governments to provide access to all of its data and resources.
I'd advise you to look up what "racism" means but you're obviously not here for a rational debate.
As for "How would you know what Microsoft would do?" knowing that they would not willingly provide a foreign government with personally identifiable data doesn't require telepathic insights into the mind of Satya Nadella.
I'm no fan of Microsoft, but if they (or other buyer) is willing to ensure the data is not fed to the Communist China govt, and reaches an agreement with US govt regarding how they will handle these security concerns, then what's the problem?
All countries should ban tik tok (as it currently operates).
Funny that an objectively true statement following by a logical conclusion is getting downvoted.
Clearly the mobilisation of an agenda in the comments section.
There are very valid reasons why TikTok should be banned in the US (and any Western nation).
Exactly. Huge time sink for the teenagers. However I almost turned my house into a warzone when I tried to ban my kids from using TikTok.
A sale to Microsoft would change that.
For sure, because Microsoft will make it boring. It's no longer hip when your short form video social network is from the same company that made that word processor you need to use to write your essay homework.
Yep they probably will!
It is of no direct-monetary value to Microsoft, it is PR for brand recognition to a young generations, the first in decades who would not be familiar with Microsoft's traditional flagship products (barring the Xbox which is a money-driven exercise with limited Microsoft branding).
Considering even the most minor of positive fluctuations on its stock price would pay for it tenfold, it's a no-lose situation for them. It is going to be a political headache though.
Microsoft won’t change it. Look at the Github acquisition.
Microsoft will voluntarily provide personally identifiable data from systems it owns to a foreign government?
Why would Microsoft risk their entire business, which they have staked in the highly regulated cloud industry, by allowing a business unit which has no impact on its bottom line to continue to provide PI data to the Chinese government?
If that is your opinion then fair enough. They haven’t interfered in GitHub’s direction, beyond bundling it in enterprise sales, as it was a PR purchase. It would make no sense on any level to do that.
All I know Google/Facebook/YouTube/Amazon/ebay..Sold my information to each other
Any products I search online will be showing on my facebook.
This is an entirely different debate. The use of your (not PI data) in DMP and data exchanges is creepy but it is part of the user agreements you sign up for. It is not personally identifiable first and foremost. In my field of work I am somewhat of an expert on this and I have big issues with it but it is a different debate.
Lots of businesses buy and sell anonymised data which they can use to build highly personalised segment audiences for marketing purposes.
It is not the same as the clandestine harvesting of personally identifiable data being made available to a foreign government.
There is a clique of agenda driven posters here trying to dismiss this with charges of racism, straw-man arguments and whataboutism. All classic strategies out of the playbook. I hope you and others can see this for what it is.
You'd have to pay me to buy that and I say that as a millenial/Gen Y
It's because majority of TikTok demographics is Gen Z. How TikTokers see Millenials is how Millenials see Facebook users.
Arguably just doing to China what they did to Facebook/Google etc.
China didn't force a sale. They just copied the shit out of everyone else.
USA isn't forcing a sale. They're just going to block TikTok, unless it's sold to a US corporation.
They are - read the article.
No sale - banned from operations.
Sale to US or their close allies - no ban.
If you were a shareholder or owner what would you do?
They still banned Facebook/Google from entering their country.
No different to USA. Except US has given a choice to Tiktok to sell to non Chinese entity or be banned.
If Tiktok don't want to sell then they don't have too just no longer in the US as per Facebook/Google in China.
They didn't ban Facebook or Google. Facebook and Google chose not to operate in China as they did not want to follow the local laws.
@Poppin: And the fact that you cant access news sites such as the BBC, The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal is also cause news decided not to operate in China?
@KBZ: The BBC operates outside of China and access is blocked from with in China, just like how India banned TikTok. What the US is proposing is very different.
@Poppin: How is it different? They are blocking TikTok from operating within their borders.
If the source of the objection was removed, then the ban would not be required.
If the Chinese government bought the BBC, which can't happen obviously, then likewise the ban would not be required.
A major difference of course is that the ban of the BBC in China is to limit access to information and news. A TikTok ban is not associated with trying to prevent US citizens from hearing news.
@[Deactivated]: For one the US is suggesting it should get a cut from the sale. It reads of extortion.
Second, its motivated by speculation rather than actual risks to national security as all content already resides outside China. (It's funny how many national security laws the US has, yet it opposes HK having any national security laws.)
What this says to me is that the US government is not much different from the Chinese government, or any government. It's a play to control the hearts and minds of the populace as it sees fit, against any perceived or actual foreign influence. The US has their way, and the Chinese have theirs, two side of the same coin.
@Poppin: The US government trying to tax the deal, I agree you could read it as you have outlined. The US President is a buffoon and his statement is buffoonery.
The risk of the Chinese government accessing data is real because they control all Chinese enterprise. Perfectly valid.
Buy it buy it buy it
Pretty good shakedown really
Exactly;
"Nice place social network you've got there. It would be a shame if something happened to it."
$50 billion USD, cheaper to pull a China and reverse engineer the source code and release "TOk Tik"
If people are worried about the security implications of having TikTok installed on their device, they should not install it.
Of course.
Unfortunately the data that the app records goes beyond the install base.
Shortsighted comment TBH. The user will be indirectly sharing information beyond their own details by using it. It is the very nature of data acquisition to these organisations. At least US companies have a privacy policy. TikTok instead says it won’t disclose yet it knows damn well it has to disclose everything to its government with no reason required.
No-one is forcing that devices must have the app. It is at the discretion of the user.
I don't see how that is shortsighted. End users should take responsibility.
So much for "land of the free"
if you just repeat this to the droves of illegal aliens crossing from Mexico, they'll no doubt turn around and forgo seeking a better life in America
/s
I have reported - this should have been posted as a deal.
For those who want to understand that better:
https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-ban-us-national-security-…
Particularly, I don't care about TikTok and believe there is an increasing tendency of boycotting Chinese companies in the US (and followers). I find it difficult to understand why TikTok might represent a risk but other similar companies (and apps) don't. It's a similar difficulty that I have to understand why Huawei represents a risk, but not OnePlus, Xiaomi and others (the ties with the Chinese government are not always evident but are usually there, and if Chinese companies might have to collaborate with the Chinese government as per the Chinese law, the problem is always there). It's only a question of time until other companies are banned, for different reasons, and the lobby behind those decisions is obvious.
I'd suggest the US Government could ban TikTok use by officials using official devices as Kaspersky was banned, but apart from that people should make their own decisions, providing the information being shared with the app are disclosed and clear. I think that's the main point here: what kind of information is shared and why is that relevant for a particular app?
Respectfully, this level of Whataboutism is quite reductive.
Huawei's presence in infrastructure is a significant security risk, for IP and national security.
TikTok are harvesting huge amounts of PII data, proximity data andeven contents of user's clipboards. This data is all available to the Chinese government if they wish.
The urgency with TikTok is due to its market share
Only US and the other countries which kowtow to them have banned Huawei. Why hasn't Germany or France done it?
Countering a criticism of whataboutism with whataboutism.
If you ask, I'm pro boycotting China, and countries becoming more independent, but I don't think that's the case here.
If the infrastructure were the only problem with Huawei, they could have banned the company from the infrastructure, not from selling smartphones. That would be more reasonable and justifiable. The presence of Huawei phones in the US was not a threat.
Again, what's the difference between Huawei and Xiaomi or OnePlus smartphones if they collect data that can be used by the Chinese government?
What the US did was a lot more than protecting the infrastructure.
It's a reasonable question but it is a different debate (I wouldn't be in favour of boycotting China fwiw). Huawei phones are banned in the US because Huawei as an organisation is banned, as is collaborating with them. It is broadly focussed, not narrowly focussed. This is because of Huawei's role in infrastructure projects. Legislatively, picking and choosing from a pre-existing list of products and services provided by one organisation is not an efficient or workable way of achieving the aim of preventing Huawei from being involved in national communications infrastructure projects.
Is there a difference between Huawei and Xiaomi or OnePlus smartphones? Probably not. But the manufacturing of consumer electronics is not the burning issue and a broad ban on consumer electronics manufactured in China is not realistic or in anybody's interests. The issue is compromising a nation's communications infrastructure, the implications of which go beyond obtaining personal information about individuals (which is in and of itself an issue). No country should put itself in a position where its national security and economy could be crippled on a whim by a foreign government.
No country should put itself in a position where its national security and economy could be crippled on a whim by a foreign government.
Too late. Forget data and IT, just look at manufacturing. We can't make sh1t here anymore - nothing works without China.
Luckily for us, at least in the immediate, the whims of others are tempered by our dollars and by the possibility of violence by some big players who won't fancy going down quickly.
@[Deactivated]: Huawei is banned for a reason. They have been caught selling products with backdoors. A simple google search will verify. I recall Vodafone kicking up quite a stink. This is not Huawei being singled out for no reason.
So much for "land of the free" and an "open economy". Seems to only apply if you are on the same side as USA Inc.
Every country is at it.
There was a backlash against the Japanese in the 80s when they were buying up US real estate. US is also eagle eyed on the USD vs Japanese Yen.
US wants to continue to be global reserve currency therefore high USD allows US companies to buy overseas companies on the cheap and cheap products for US consumers.
US focus on trade specific country trade surpluses with the US, thinking if you narrow the surplus you avoid leakage of the dollar. But the world is an ecosystem balanced by floating currency to solve deficits and surpluses (or does it?).
China just does it differently - overseas businesses need to have joint venture with local partners and some industries require technology transfers.
Some countries like France protect a few large organisations to have national champions (Soc Gen etc) blocking mergers / takeovers etc.
So no new news.
When China bans/censors something it is called "authoritarianism".
When the US bans/censors something it is called "protecting national security".
Cool soundbyte, doesn't really stack up to reality.
China is an authoritarian, absolute party-state with a state-run economy. That's just a fact, for better or worse. That is likely to be the underlying factor behind its bans/censorship.
The United States, for all its many, many (many) faults, is not. The bans being discussed here are "protecting national security", the national economy and the integrity of the national state. In this instance, from an authoritarian, absolute party-state.
That is likely to be the underlying factor behind its bans/censorship.
If that is your belief, then you're not really interested in reality. The USA has a strong tradition of supporting dictators and even overthrowing democratically elected leaders with their own puppets. They are imposing sanctions left, right, and centre around the world. How can you claim that the US cares about authoritarianism when they themselves engage in thug tactics worldwide (even with their allies) and provide military aid to many dictatorships? Maybe it's something else about China that irks them, don't you think?
This is an absurd straw-man argument. I have no interest in defending US foreign or domestic policy and it has no relevance to the merits of blocking TikTok and the policies they are implementing domestically.
@[Deactivated]: You believe that the TikTok ban is a result of the US government concerns about Chinese authoritarianism. If you believe that is the case, then why is this concern mostly limited to China? Wouldn't there be concerns with all the other dictatorships around the world? Are you ignoring the hypocrisy? You will have to come up with a better explanation for the ban than a concern about authoritarianism.
@kahn: You are attributing that to me, again with another straw-man argument. I believe that the TikTok ban is, quite obviously, a result of an app being used at scale in their country harvesting private information about users and their network that goes far beyond the scope of the requirements of the application, and this is driven by the US's national security interests.
TikTok has been fined in the past for illegally collecting information about minors and Apple has outed them as saving information from users' clipboards. The level of data they collect is alarming, again beyond the functionality requirements of the app, and the clincher is that a foreign government has access to all of this data based on the law there. This data is not being collected by accident and for no reason. And the reason is not for app functionality or to monetise for marketing purposes.
I am repeating information that everybody knows. Objections to this aren't driven by an analysis of the facts. No reasonable person without an agenda could dismiss this as being ok and attack any autonomous nation for not acquiescing freely to this level of data flow to a foreign power, and one which is currently committing genocide (as per its UN definition) against a portion of its own population.
@[Deactivated]: Yes, I'm certainly not going to disagree with you about the privacy issues. It's this fake concern about dictatorships and, yes, even genocide which you've just brought up that are red herrings. Inserting morality into this issue is unwise as the US has no leg to stand on.
However, even if we are to limit the concern to data privacy, there is also the hypocrisy of the well-documented NSA/CIA/FBI spying. So, the US isn't concerned about data privacy as a principle either. The only thing that we can safely claim is that they are concerned about protecting their own data from foreign nations. If one attempts to embellish the reason, then it's going to be difficult to survive scrutiny.
@kahn: I am not moralising about the US as I have stressed repeatedly, and this is yet another entry in the series of straw-man arguments you have made. Genocide is not a "Red Herring". The fact that TikTok is owned by a power which is practicing this highlights the urgency of the US following through with its ban. If TikTok was harvesting data and making it available to the government of Luxembourg it would not be as urgent.
"Whataboutism" is another classic deflection topic. Any other topic about US foreign (or indeed domestic) policy requires a separate discussion and it has no relevance to whether the US should allow practices like those demonstrated by TikTok to occur within their borders. The US are acting in the interests of its people and its national security. Their actions on this topic are fully justified.
if you want to discuss US foreign policy, manifest destiny, expansionism, exceptionalism or the Munroe Doctrine, start another chat about that.
@[Deactivated]: You are the one who is entertaining these fantasies about the concern over dictatorships and genocide. You have brought them up, or at the very least, you believe them. If I point out the hypocrisy over these concerns, then it is a criticism of that argument. It's really that simple.
@kahn: It's not, this is just desperation from you to argue. Absolutely everything i have said is objectively relevant to the argument
@kahn: Such a shame that you haven't established hypocrisy beyond arguing against flimsy straw-man arguments that you attribute to me rather than engaging in an adult discussion about a very black and white issue.
If your aim was to create noise then you have succeeded I suppose. If your aim was actually to have a discussion, I suggest that you have failed.
@[Deactivated]: Out of curiosity, how do you propose one to prove hypocrisy without being accused of making strawman statements?
@kahn: One approach would be to respond to what people say instead of attributing another opinion to someone and attacking that. It's how a discussion is meant to work.
You have gone down so far down your current path I don't expect you ever had any intention of engaging in a discussion. Your staunch opposition to a country implementing domestic policies which protect its interest is your prerogative of course.
@[Deactivated]: You brought up genocide as a reason for the urgency of banning TikTok. In what way is genocide relevant to this TikTok fiasco? Are you claiming the US disapproves of genocide? Does it not want to do business with a country that engages in genocide?
@kahn: For the reasons I gave in my post which you are ignoring.
If you want to have a respectful adult discussion I will engage further. If you continue with the straw man arguments I’ll leave you to your trolling
@[Deactivated]: You keep bringing up this clipboard thing as if it's an issue unique to Tiktok. It's not - the likes of fruit ninja (!), New York Times, weather apps etc ALSO take information from the clipboard - which is not a malicious piece of code or anything since it was designed to be used by apps.
You might also want to know that TikTok no longer collects this information (whereas many others continue to do so).
As noted by BBC (as a somewhat objective viewpoint, though it's hard to tell nowadays), 'Most evidence points to TikTok's data collection being comparable to other data-hungry social networks such as Facebook' .
Tiktok has offered far more assurance than other social media platforms, including opening up its code and moderation algorithm to scrutiny.
Just like with Huawei, it is all theoretical, in that there is some possible link drawn up in some people's minds that the current primary antagonist of the USA may somehow leverage this information against them. Just like how Hong Kong Councillors thinks that Chinese experts helping with COVID testing in Hong Kong is there to collect their DNA sample for surveillance. You can believe whatever it is you choose to believe.
This is only a 'black and white' issue (a peculiar choice of term nowadays especially when it comes to the US) insofar as the US absolutely have a right to ban the app from within their borders. I support that 100%, just as China bans Google from inside their own borders, or India banning Chinese apps. That's the right of the ruling government.
@Fiximol: They’re not all saving items on the clipboard and this behaviour has been highlighted by Apple.
I hope that any readers here look this information up for themselves (and everything else discussed here)
@Fiximol: It’s false that not all apps store data in a clipboard, it’s false that Apple has highlighted what TikTok is doing or it’s false that readers should look things up for themselves…
Interesting argument
@[Deactivated]: Please direct me to where you found such information that they are 'saving items on the clipboard'.
The researchers who found that TikTok is one of the many apps accessing the clipboard literally said "However, it is not clear what the apps do with the data." - it's in the link I pasted.
So, do you know something that the experts, don't?
@Fiximol: https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2020/06/26/warning-a…
There are hundreds of articles about TikTok’s behaviour. Create noise and call me a liar all you want.
As for your claim that nobody knows what TikTok are doing with this data, you are right and that is obviously true. Nobody knows what they are doing with this data.
@[Deactivated]: Did you read that 'article'? They were 'caught out' accessing the universal clipboard, (just like 50+ other apps). Nowhere does it say they are STORING the data, which is what you incorrectly claimed. They are not alone in this. They are not breaking any rules. They used an existing feature that Apple put in. They even have gave a reason for doing it. They are committed to not do it since people seem to hate it. Heck, even discord triggered that iOS14 warning.
If you read into the tone of that Forbes article, you can tell the author has already made up their mind and is trying to persuade the reader to a particular point of view. It's not journalism. It's persuasive writing.
@Fiximol: I have read it. As you have. And you are trying to argue over semantics in order to distract from a blatantly obvious issue.
As is your prerogative. If you want to argue that they aren’t saving the data that’s up to you. Maybe they just availed of this API functionality to do… nothing.
It doesn’t change the narrative one iota
@[Deactivated]: Now who is putting up strawman arguments? I have not said they aren't saving the data - I simply said that we have no evidence that they are, and asked for proof of it, which you have failed to provide even though you made a claim that they were, indeed, storing the data, and a claim made by Apple, no less. This is not semantics - you either have a reliable source that say Tiktok is the only app accessing and STORING all your clipboard data, or you don't. We have proof of the first action, that they are accessing the clipboard. We do not have proof of the second - again, unless you know something I don't - and I am always open to be educated.
It absolutely changes the narrative - if 50+ different apps are accessing the clipboard, as we know for a fact, why is Tiktok being singled out? This is a purely political move. Odds are they would have moved against Tiktok, or some other Chinese company - The US look like they are lining up DJI in the firing lines - irrespective of whether such flaws existed or were unique to the particular product/company.
Again, I am defending the US Government's right to do so - such is their prerogative, but to actually take the reasoning for such a ban at their face value would be disingenuous.
@Fiximol: You are right, we don't have evidence about what they are doing with the data they are accessing for no reason.
TikTok, as you know, are not being "singled" out for this. But this conversation is about TikTok. A few dozen of the several thousand of apps available are doing this, and not all are doing it nefariously as it is iOS SDK functionality which serves a purpose in some apps.
Thanks OP. Bought 6 TikToks.
To all those commentators approving and applauding this type of behavior especially Chase - you are correct in the sense that US and foreign apps/news have been banned from operating in China however China never claimed to be the champions of democracy and free speech. They have proudly identified themselves as communist (ie: China Inc.) and have never strayed from that ideology since chairman Mao.
But the US and their brown nosing allies seem to flip flop around their ethics and beliefs to tailor suit their own personal agenda. Hypocrite much?
Good decision..
Trump asking for cut is ridiculous but nothing wrong in protecting key personal data from a hostile foreign government.
Nothing against Chinese people (who don't have any freedom) but increasingly the world does not trust the Chinese regime.
Thanks so much MrTheirABC.
nothing wrong as there is concerns on your data if it stays with Chinese owned company.. India banned it recently citing data security
Fiddy cents is my offer