In short, any website owned by anyone in a foreign country can be banned by this act. Maybe they can't get rumble specifically, but they'll try to get protonmail, and likely other important stuff as well.
It's just asking for internet censorship.
Business & Finance TikTok Thread
- Thread starter Husky_Khan
- Start date
In short, any website owned by anyone in a foreign country can be banned by this act. Maybe they can't get rumble specifically, but they'll try to get protonmail, and likely other important stuff as well.
It's just asking for internet censorship.
So more like Kiwifarms then Rumble.
I can see it as that but it specifically mentions people not in the US, companies not in the US.
I hate to say it, but in a world where our adversaries can have control over so much with an app.
It makes sense.
Of course it can be abused.
There is only so much you can do...
No, you miss who's the greatest danger to Americans: the US government.
You are giving the US government another lever to threaten companies with and exert control. The Patriot Act was a massive mistake. So is this.
But...where in this bill does it mention American companies?
So, first question: do you think TikTok and/or other foreign owned websites and applications are a threat to the United States and its citizens from either from an espionage perspective or a unconventional warfare perspective?
If yes, then how exactly would you counter such a threat in a way that is effective and not just handwaving "people should be more responsible and not download TikTok".
Sorta. They are a threat, but honestly no more a threat than most of our domestic companies who also just sell China the info and push wokeness because the company likes it.
Ban transfer of US citizen data to the CCP (or companies owned by the CCP, etc). This hits the actual problem, instead of allowing Biden to just shut down sites he doesn't like. Because who cares who owns them if Facebook etc still send our info to china for some cash?
As for banning pushing an ideology, I don't want to give that power to the US government, or the ideology they ban will be something like gun rights or the like.
No, it's banning apps and websites that are 20% owned by foreigners, first of all. That's an arbitrary limit that can be countered by shell companies if it needs to be. Second, it's not even banning them. It's letting the president choose whether or not he wants to ban them. So Biden will get to threaten to ban any foreign website unless it promotes DEI. That's what the bill will actually do.
Okay...and a republican president can Ban TikTok and any apps or websites that they want as well.
Two way street for one.
And outside TikTok, what websites or Apps are there that go against what the US wants? Name some.
Yes that's the problem. Republicans might ban some sights you don't like, but the other side gets the power too, and they'll be able to ban sites that are spreading useful information.
It's a GIANT power grab by the government and will be used to control the flow of information and restrict your freedoms.
You're retarded as fuck for supporting it. Seriously. And I hate tiktok. This just is not the answer to the problem. Don't fall victim to the "well he have to do SOMETHING" mental trap. This leads to bad outcomes. Just look at the retarded responses to covid for example. Making bad decisions just because you think any decision needs to be made is a mistake.
As for your final question? Try ANY NEWS ORGANIZATION that isn't US owned. They could ban any one of those. What if we have another covid-like situation? Or an election integrity issue? With this, they could ban websites that are sharing news about it.
Name some then....
Okay...how are they going to restrict those sites, for one, and two, name some examples.
So...what can they do? Let Chinese Spyware thay is known to get access to the wifi signals as well not just the ones on the phone and the interconnected systems TO said wifi.
At least from what I remember.
But hey, it's okay of the Chinese spy on us guys.
Okay....what news organizations that arnt US owned were right about covid?
Dude are you stupid? Name some of them? ANY FUCKING WEBSITE THAT ISN'T US OWNED (20% foreign owned) could be banned by a president for saying things he doesn't like. That's most of the internet, dude. All he has to do is say "well this news is interfering in elections," and he has power to ban whatever he wants.
We aren't saying let China spy on us, we are saying THIS ISN'T THE RIGHT ANSWER. This gives the president way too much power, and doesn't even solve the problem because US companies can still datamine and then sell that to china. Which they already do.
Doing anything just because you feel you must do something, is wrong. This is a power grab. It's obviously a power grab, and they're using LEGITIMATE fear and concerns about tiktok to get retards like you to support it.
Last edited:
Okay...where in the bill does it say this, how would they do it...and name some.
Okay. Then give examples of how we can ban tiktok....or get rid if it, or prevent Chinese owned companies from gaining so much access to US systems.
Come on now.
All this has been answered already, try reading the thread
Yes, double censorship is going to work out great, I foresee no problems with this. Seriously, your a nice person, but you need to get that boot out of your mouth.
.....no one has offered any actual answers.
All I have seen is complaining.
Any kind of banning selling information to our adversaries is useless because you would give the government power to see every where the information goes.
That is the only argument I have seen.
How would it be enforced?
Explain. Honestly, where in the bill does it give them power to make a great firewall like China has?
Did you actually read the bill yourself?
I literally posted parts of the bill, with highlights, and a link to the bill.
Right there. Image 2: It's unlawful to provide certain websites internet hosting. Which websites? (g)3b(ii) answers that:
Literally allowing the president to executive order the banning of ISPs dealing with any foreign website. The bill is dogshit censorship by executive order.
That's some bad e-lawyering. For one, foreign adversary in legalese is something that has a set definition, and the president can't just add random site owners to the list on a whim.
15 CFR § 7.4 - Determination of foreign adversaries.
(i) is controlled by a foreign adversary; and
(ii) that is determined by the President...
Pay attention to the *and* in the first point. Logically it has massive impact on point 2. As in President's determination is not applicable to any entity that doesn't meet the first point.