Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
The TikTok debate has always been about the balance between national security and free speech.

We found a compromise. TikTok will remain, all of its national security risks will remain. Also, the law that tramples free speech is upheld by the court, but will be blantently ignored and unenforced.

Everybody loses. This outcome is worse than anyone could have conceived.

- "Everybody loses. This outcome is worse than anyone could have conceived."

The outcome is *exactly* as anyone with a modicum of sense expected.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"—often paraphrased (sensibly!) as "deserve neither and *will lose both*." As you say: we've lost both—who could have predicted that? Yeah; well.

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin

There's nothing really novel about the instant situation. It's a classic, on repeat.

loading story #42760091
loading story #42759924
loading story #42760801
loading story #42760113
loading story #42760444
loading story #42759994
loading story #42760021
loading story #42760084
loading story #42761122
loading story #42760086
loading story #42759896
Soldiers were already sharing videos of aircraft carriers on Rednote which hasn't gone through the whole shenanigans of paying Larry Ellison to host it on Oracle Cloud and so on. The national security risk is the US military apparently not being able to convince its own soldiers to be thoughtful about cybersecurity.
loading story #42760335
loading story #42759905
loading story #42763037
loading story #42760212
loading story #42760211
loading story #42760230
loading story #42760224
> The TikTok debate has always been about the balance between national security and free speech

And now about how the sitting president can profit from brokering it

There's something in this argument about national security, that if taken to its logical conclusion, would result in a world most people would consider upside-down:

If social media owned by foreign companies is a national security threat, then wouldn't that essentially make FB, X, YouTube a threat to like every other nation? Why not throw wikipedia in too? So now any nation can legitimately see any other source or collector of information as a national security threat and ban it at will? Taken to the logical conclusion, every nation should be enveloped by its own digital borders.

To me, it's the popular sentiment alone, for example people feeling sad and upset TikTok's gone and feeling happy that it's back, that's preventing this dismal future, otherwise governments would block apps on a whim. And this I'd say is a win.

This isn't about free speech. Tiktok's statement actually provides all of the necessary context. China pays influencers. The tiktok ban is not about what you are allowed to say, but who is allowed to pay you to say it. This is a very different question.
Can someone please explain how the law tramples free speech? Isn’t it completely legal to shut down a stadium or arena?

Additionally, why have we all forgotten that China does not allow any of our social media companies within their borders?

If we’re in the business of free trade, there’s no reason to let them operate a social media company in the US until they’ve opened their market to us.

{"deleted":true,"id":42761826,"parent":42759755,"time":1737320828,"type":"comment"}
> This outcome is worse than anyone could have conceived.

This is the maximally stupid outcome, so I suppose we should have seen it coming. I guess the conclusion is going to involve Trump taking an ownership stake in TikTok, possibly by swapping it for $TRUMP cryptocurrency or Truth Social shares something.

loading story #42760065
This seems not to be an opinion that other people hold, but I never saw social media as “free speech” given that some third party can decides which parts of what you say get promoted.

If you sent letters to people via a middleman who decided which of those to forward onwards, you’d see that as censorship. I appreciate that that’s an over-simplified example - it’s meant to be a reductio ad absurdum. But control of the algorithm effectively regulates free speech, IMO.

Also (for clarity) the fact that China happens to be involved is not relevant to my point!

… the law that tramples free speech is upheld by the court

This law does not trample free speech. Your view of what free speech means as it pertains to U.S. law is wrong.

This is not an outcome. The legal process is but still well underway. In the United States, we abide by the rule of law.[1] That's really what separates us from China.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law

No there's going to be some obvious winners. Trump is going to force a 50% sale to a US based JV. That JV will be run by / benefit some of his biggest goons.

So Trump & his circle win !

I just don’t get how free speech translates as accessibility to post on a commercial platform.
{"deleted":true,"id":42761526,"parent":42759755,"time":1737319048,"type":"comment"}
This is exactly what all Europeans watching US politics expected. No more, no less.
Everyone lives and dies by the KING now.
{"deleted":true,"id":42760078,"parent":42759755,"time":1737312043,"type":"comment"}
It's an absolute win for the content creators who relied on TikTok for their livelihoods and the small businesses who relied on it for marketing. And for Gen Z, for whom content creation is one of the few viable ways to earn a good income now that tech grad hiring has completely collapsed.
loading story #42763659
Everybody loses? The fact that TikTok remains available to millions of users is a significant benefit, especially for those who rely on it for creative expression, community building, and small-business promotion.
loading story #42760470
loading story #42759963
loading story #42760035
loading story #42760044
loading story #42759964
Chase Hughes:

"Manipulation Playbook: The 20 Indicators of Reality Control"

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

What also bothers me is there's a simple solution to all this. Just pass comprehensive consumer data protection laws and regulations all companies operating in the US are required to follow. But you don't see anyone proposing that for some reason...
>Also, the law that tramples free speech

I'm not sure how so many people misunderstand the difference between "free speech" and "app controlled by hostile foreign government".

The people speaking on TikTok have not lost their right to free speech, they still are free to use a multitude of other channels that amplify their speech. No speech was blocked, only the app controlled by a hostile foreign government was blocked, and there are no provisions in a any legal framework that says we can't stop a hostile foreign government from controlling what people in this country see.

It was never about that balance. It was always about populism.
The answer is to not use TikTok.
> balance between national security and free speech.

This is an absurd framing. Free speech cannot implicate national security. If a social media platform controlled by a foreign government can manipulate the people so easily then you have a much larger and ignored problem.

> all of its national security risks

Which are zero. What you actually experience a risk from is the shabby way Google, Microsoft and Apple have put their platforms together. Designed to earn them money while utterly destroying your privacy.

> This outcome is worse

You're already in trouble. This outcome is a symptom of a much larger problem. The conversation around this is completely detached from reality.

>Everybody loses.

Huh? Trump singlehandedly bringing TikTok back for tens of millions of malleable voters. Sounds like a pretty huge victory for him!

This 4 years gonna be good. Trump #1 was amateur time, this time they come prepared to bring havoc.
Plus Trump got all major social media in his pocket.
“National security” is such a bs term for US govt to avoid transparency. It comes from the post 9/11 era of FISA courts, PATRIOT act to justify wide net domestic surveillance and wiretapping.

To me, the whole banning of TT is political theater aimed to divide the US while existing tech oligarchs consolidate power and money.

Just look at the message TT broadcasted. Blatant pandering of incoming administration.

loading story #42761055
Trump wins, everyone loses.

Get used to it.

It's worse than that. The platform is now beholden to the president for its survival.

If you're wondering how Russia slipped from a flawed democracy into an aurocracy, it was because Yeltsin fixed the 1996 election, by holding an axe over the head of the press. He made it very clear that anybody who wants to keep their broadcast licenses will need to shill for him.

It's how a drunken autocrat with an 8% approval rating, credited for both hyperinflation and mass unemployment, who launched a coup (that killed a few hundred people and caused a constitutional crisis) ended up getting re-elected.

And then at the eleventh hour, after firing his cabinet, again, he declares Putin his successor and resigns over a $10,000 bribery scandal.

What outcome are you talking about comrade? Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
[flagged]
loading story #42760083
loading story #42760041
loading story #42760237
Free speech?

Can you talk about the Tiananmen Square massacre on TikTok and show the few videos of people who were disappeared?

Are they accessible in the country that owns TikTok?

loading story #42760693
loading story #42761215
"The law banning TikTok, which was scheduled to go into effect Sunday, allows the president to grant a 90-day extension before the ban is enforced, provided certain criteria are met"

Sounds like they're operating within the law

loading story #42759982
loading story #42760031
loading story #42761369
loading story #42759986