Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
that's likely the largest reason it went through. If you think US social networking companies weren't pushing the ban for financial reasons, you're just being silly.

404 did an article on it: https://www.404media.co/a-tiktok-ban-is-a-gift-to-meta-and-i...

You think Zuckerberg paid off the Supreme Court? You’ve got to be joking.

Even Trump, who we know Zuckerberg had donated to, claims he will try to “bring back TikTok”.

This case was argued and won on the basis of national data security.

At least one Supreme Court justice is well known to be corrupt. I certainly wouldn’t rule it out.
Of course I read that and know the arguments, I'm not an idiot.

But I see through it because once again, I'm not an idiot.

When far more sensitive social media apps like Grindr were sold to Beijing Kunlun Tech Co Ltd, nobody went crazy because it didn't threaten FAANG.

There's many swiping and dating apps owned by chinese firms. You also have chinese capital firms being the primary investor in cloud and photo sharing apps. Plenty of sensitive stuff going through the spindly fingers of the shifty orientals without a peep - for like decades.

There's even Chinese finance apps like WeBull that hold things as sensitive as American's retirement accounts. Apparently also not a problem.

People have Wyze doorbell cameras and TCL smartTVs and Eufy security cameras. They have TP-Link routers and Hisense computer monitors. Chinese cameras, WiFi, and microphones are everywhere in the modern home.

But once something came around that was a plausible competitive threat to FAANG then all these reasons just materialize and get applied to that thing specifically.

I mean seriously. Give me a break.

We like to look back 100 years ago at protectionism and racism and tell ourselves that we were dumber back then and wouldn't fall for it now.

And yet, here we are.

My read on the situation is that this is the beginning of clamping down on _all_ (or most) of this. Also important to note the difference between racism and national security. The notion isn't "wacky chinese people ooh so mysterious so sneky", it's that the government isn't the US's ally and has (valid) reasons to want to reduce the US's grip on the global stage.

It's not (just) that it poses an economic threat to one of the biggest US companies (which as you said, I'm sure plays a big part in why it's suddenly relevant), but that it allows a government-influenced foreign media channel to influence policy indirectly by means of mass dissemination.

As for why now and not before, it's because of how apparent the possible effects are now that there's a very direct and widely spread channel that can pump OUT information, which is vastly more effective and obvious than passive surveillance through cameras or other hardware. (Also cybersecurity people have been calling out this sort of stuff for hardware since time immemorial)

loading story #42768526
loading story #42761532