Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
A point I think most people don’t understand is that the government interest in TikTok has little to do with exploiting user data per se, a lot of other companies do that. The issue is that TikTok is somewhat unique in being aggressively weaponized in currently very active “grey zone” conflicts.

This has been an open secret in national security circles but the average person on the street has no idea what a grey zone conflict is, what it looks like, or why it matters. Geopolitic strategies are increasingly executed as grey zone warfare, and some hybrid warfare, because the costs and risks of traditional overt warfare have become unacceptably high.

You mention “grey zone conflicts” then opine that people don’t know what that is…then don’t actually explain what it is!
This is the very top of the "Description" section of the Wikipedia page for "Grey-zone (international relations)"[0]:

> Use of the term grey-zone is widespread in national security circles, but there is no universal agreement on the definition of grey-zone, or even whether it is a useful term, with views about the term ranging from "faddish" or "vague", to "useful" or "brilliant"

It goes on to say:

> Grey zone warfare generally means a middle, unclear space that exists between direct conflict and peace in international relations.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey-zone_(international_relat...

loading story #42756096
loading story #42755346
{"deleted":true,"id":42755297,"parent":42754993,"time":1737277446,"type":"comment"}
The conflict in Palestine was one (1).

The ADL head (Greenblatt) noted they had a major issue with young people seeing footage from the front lines negatively impacting perception of Israel, this is in a leaked voice memo from early 2024. Ban legislation followed within a month.

(1) https://x.com/wikileaks/status/1852851603365036222

https://x.com/PatriotSt0rm17/status/1878777137479712889

https://x.com/infolibnews/status/1878706591626924522

{"deleted":true,"id":42754909,"parent":42754892,"time":1737273512,"type":"comment"}
"Grey zone conflict" sounds a lot like our powers are upset they don't have the level of control over information that the adversary has. They want to be the ones to censor, suppress, and promote, rather than another country. The goal isn't more open access to information.
loading story #42754908
This misunderstands the topic, it literally has nothing to do with information access.

The Chinese government invested a lot for decades in R&D around population-scale behavioral manipulation, including running a lot of experiments on their own population. It was an impressive research effort; other countries invest in this too but the Chinese commitment to mastery of it was next level. Not an issue.

These capabilities and techniques can make populations wired into it dance like predictable puppets in aggregate but they don’t work that effectively over generic undifferentiated communication channels because humans are too chaotic. It requires tight real-time feedback, control, and instrumentation of the information channels with sufficient critical mass population-wise to matter. Those kinds of tight feedback and control loops under direct control of government systems for constructive manipulation aren’t really a thing at most social media companies. You can spam propaganda but that is qualitatively inferior.

Divestiture of TikTok removes the access and control the Chinese government needs to effect outcomes with TikTok beyond typical propaganda and influence operations.

Most countries desire this capability but the technical implementation and requirement of sufficiently tight control of the channel has been a formidable barrier. China outright banned any vehicle that had the potential to allow foreign governments to do the same in their own country.

All of this has been known and discussed in national security settings for decades. The difficulty of implementation in the real world made it mostly a hypothetical risk at any non-trivial scale until TikTok.

The most insidious aspect is that sophisticated operational analytics has made it such that the manipulation may seem completely unrelated to the desired population-scale effect, it is not propaganda in a conventional sense. Done well, the individual never perceives it but the aggregate effect reliably emerges. The extent to which humans can be analytically manipulated in very indirect ways at scale is both fascinating and scary.

(Many years ago I used to work on problems related to population-scale operational behavioral analysis. China was on the cutting edge of this research even back then. None of the experimental theory is new, but apparently the tech finally caught up.)

Do you have reading material you can recommend on this for someone that wants to learn enough to get an informed opinion on this?
loading story #42754873
I think it's more the other way round, that they don't want others to have the same powers they do?

If you control the "last mile" infrastructure, you have a pretty good idea what's going on. If you control the mobile network, you can track everyone, and flash their baseband processor if you like.

(see also: concerns about Huawei equipment in our internet infrastructure)

The documents that Snowden released confirmed that this kind of thing was going on. To be honest, I don't think that really surprised anyone in the security community.

We just don't want China to have the same power to monitor our citizens as we have ourselves.

> and flash their baseband processor if you like

Could you please give some source on that info?

All the real documentation for this is likely to be classified, but here's

a backdoor: https://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/replicant-developers-fin...

a patent for doing it in "civilian" applications: https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2013114317A1/en

sure, the NSA will respect that

loading story #42756523
In the US we allow significantly more spying on foreigners than US citizens. That’s not as controversial as domestic spying.

Look at the backlash against the US government trying to clamp down on Covid misinformation with a national emergency declaration [1]. There’s exactly zero reason to expect the CCP has an incentive to behave differently, especially when there’s effectively no way for companies to push back in China.

And no that doesn’t excuse the nonsense some US administrations get up to. Like undermining the effectiveness of the Chinese covid vaccine [2].

There is already evidence of pressure being applied to ByteDance by the CCP for data on Hong Kong citizens [3].

So it would be silly to think that: 1) data for different TikTok users is more or less difficult for the CCP to access based on their specific locations (technically or practically) And 2) the CCP has more respect for foreigners than Western governments do.

———

1 - https://hms.harvard.edu/news/whats-stake-us-supreme-court-ca...

2 - https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-covi...

3 - https://apnews.com/article/tiktok-china-bytedance-user-data-...

loading story #42754862
loading story #42757312
Whether they want or not, they cannot. The democratic system, even deficient as one in US, still does its job and works against blatant information suppression.
loading story #42756106
Do you have any evidence supporting anything you claimed as a matter of fact? "grey zone conflicts", "aggressively weaponized", "national security circles" are just scary/serious sounding phrases that sound a lot more legitimate than I suspect they actually are.

AOC published a video talking about how she (and some other representatives) believed that the arguments that were presented to them were just as vague, nonspecific and theoretical as these online arguments I keep reading.

Grey Zone is a pretty well documented concept in geopolitics, it's a fascinating read if you're interested.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey-zone_(international_relat...

Gray zone conflicts: Evidence shows that China, Russia, and other foreign governments are actively using social media to manipulate and influence Americans through covert and deceptive tactics.

“Aggressively weaponized”: These conflicts rely on information as a primary weapon because it is more cost-effective and impactful than traditional warfare.

“National security circles”: This term commonly refers to the U.S. security establishment, including its agencies and defense systems.

Well, you have the recent Romanian election.

Pro-Russian, right-wing candidate (Calin Georgescu) with zero funding becomes leading candidate overnight. Turns out there's coordinate campaigns to push him on social media channels, like TikTok, where tens of thousands of accounts were opened a couple of weeks prior to polls opening. All pushing Calin.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm2v13nz202o

loading story #42759011
They can’t manufacture consent anymore regarding false flag wars that only benefit large war profiteering corporations.
what “false flag” war has the US engaged in? would love a single legit example of a false flag, closest i can think of is gulf of tonkin which was quite some time ago and not actually a false flag.

i hate that nationalism is becoming another hyper-polarized topic - now we get people who are ridiculously jingoistic/anti-cosmopolitan and other people who reject fully the notion that a government’s first responsibility is to its own citizens. both are radical views that are no way to govern a well-functioning republic.

Remember when we overthrew Saddam’s government because Iraq had WMDs?
that’s not what a false flag is unless you’re saying the US secretly gassed the Kurds and blamed it on Iraq
Well they didn’t don Iraqi uniforms and take photos smiling by vx agent drums or anything I guess. But they alleged as much and got the desired response as if they did. By definition of a false flag operation, you wouldn’t expect to hear of many historical cases. But one wonders cases such as the CIA training Taliban to fight the soviet union. Was this considered a false flag? Training and arming troops and sending them to fight without your flag on their sleeve? Does it matter if they went through boot camp on parris island or in a valley in Afghanistan for this definition? Do we care more about semantical correctness here or the outcomes?
yes i think the taliban in the 90s could be a false flag, although it wasn’t used in a way to justify US intervention
the problem this law solves is that in tiktok's case the "they" who has the power to manufacture consent is the PRC
They don't need to, people share and watch the content voluntarily because it has novel value.

"Why wasn't I told this before?" Is a common sentiment in those videos.

often the reason is because it wasn’t true or they were told and weren’t listening!
loading story #42755284
loading story #42755119
loading story #42755368
loading story #42755022
>but the average person on the street has no idea what a grey zone conflict is, what it looks like, or why it matters.

Education?

College degree here, I have no idea what it actually means.
whenever the words ''national security'' appear in a paragraph, what follows next is usually nonsense or propaganda.
Chase Hughes:

"Manipulation Playbook: The 20 Indicators of Reality Control"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3AN2wY4qAM

But there is no big conspiracy. Just a lot or small ones.
You mean, Romania?
That one appears to be an own-goal by an opposing party: https://www.politico.eu/article/investigation-ties-romanian-...
loading story #42755079
loading story #42755045
loading story #42756057
loading story #42754929
>The issue is that TikTok is somewhat unique in being aggressively weaponized in currently very active “grey zone” conflicts.

That has been happening since time immemorial.

What is actually the issue is that for the first time ever in the post-WW2 Pax Americana era, media is being weaponized by a powerful non-American state (China).

America does through Facebook, Mysterious Twitter X, Reddit, CNN, Fox News, PBS, et al. what China does through TikTok. If anything, other countries should also seriously consider banning foreign media and realize insofar as future geopolitics that Pax Americana is ending.

The USSR had significant reach back at the time, and a quite ideological one. The last 25 years allowed the US to relax significantly.
According to wikipedia, China is blocking most of the sites you mentioned. I was surprised to see that Russia does not.

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_websites_blocked_i...

Didn't the USSR have a pretty good "foreign relations" propaganda team?
The editorial lines of Fox News are completely different to CNN and PBS. Different subreddits are completely different. The idea that they're all part of some conspiracy run by the US government is very strange.
loading story #42756182
[flagged]
I'm not a "China supporter" so much as I am simply stating reality for what it is.

America banned TikTok because it's not something America can control, that really is all there is to it. It's even stated right there in the law: Sell TikTok to America and they can do business.