you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 78 points 2 years ago (4 children)

They're technically not banning tiktok, they're banning China from owning tiktok

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Which is somehow even worse : it's like only the USA is allowed to spy on everyone!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    They can still spy, but why would we make it easier for them?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    So you don't ridiculise your country by promoting freedom of trade but seizing the assets of the countries you don't like when it's a better tech than yours.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    You can't be ridiculed if you feel no shame.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago*

    our most and least popular politician is a sex predator who earned all his money by his dad dying and is currently at risk of losing his money because he can't stop lying about things.

    The greatest monument to american shamelessness is Donald J Trump.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    I'm not with my government on a lot of things they do. I want the same data rights and restrictions to apply to all companies that host people's personal information.

    But what's this about Impressive tech? Tiktoc? First that's laughable, even more laughable is how you phrase is as if anyone would give a fuck if another country had some better tech. Sounds like you are projecting your own insecurities.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    And it’s not like they can’t maintain use of the thing while not being owners. Come on. Like there’s some magic rule if a company’s not owned by China, it can’t be used as a Chinese intelligence source? Come on.

    If social media is in cahoots with foreign intelligence, there are better ways to handle it in my opinion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    They're functionally forcing the sale of the company to a US Firm at fire sale prices.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yeah, you are right. They should do like they do in China, sell to a JV with a local company at fire sales price... Oh wait

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago

    sell to a JV with a local company at fire sales price

    The Chinese policy is to share ownership with locals, so that a firm isn't simply extracting wealth from the Chinese market.

    The American policy is to seize a pre-existing firm after it has developed, by accusing its Singapore founder of being a secret Chinese Communist.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    This is primarily intended as a hostile buyout of tiktok. It has literally nothing to do with China.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    Lmao, the USA doesn't operate the commercial sector outside of power, trains, rockets, and planes. It won't benefit from the sale in any way other than lowering Chinese involvement.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The US government works for the billionaires that run the economy. Many billionaires want to buy tiktok. In fact, there's already teams of people set up for buying out tiktok. The government is just the tool for the hostile acquisition. No one said the US government is directly purchasing tiktok.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The US Government and Billionaires are opposing forces, one political party wants to tax billionaires while the other is on the payroll.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    They’re not at all opposing forces. Some billionaires are in competition with each other and political parties are tools at certain billionaires disposal.

    The act of taxing income is but one political mechanism used to influence the power of some billionaires over another.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    So which of these shadow government billionaires is pro-government in your eyes?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    I’m not sure I understand your question. They are both pro-government. If any one human could be the personification of government, it would be the President of the United States.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    So every billionaire is pro-government, and against taxation, but also pro-taxation to hurt the other billionaires (each other) but also the political party with a platform of "Tax the Rich" is in no way actually opposed to the political party who literally cuts taxes for the rich?

    You should see a doctor.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    Again, taxation is but one of many levers pulled in the working of government which have substantial implications on billionaires. Whether and where to impose tariffs or regulation, for example, are decisions which wealthy business owners are very concerned.

    I’ll see a doctor as soon as you approach others with more respect. Let’s not Reddit Lemmy with unmerited hostility.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -23 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    They're not going to sell though. The US only makes up a single-digit % of their users.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [+] -17 points 2 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (3 children)
  • [+] -25 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Then you agree that they're not going to sell? What does being the largest single market have to do with this? Fucking make a point, dude.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Calm the fuck down dude, jesus christ. Go touch grass

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Do you have a source for that?

    This seems to claim the most users are from the U.S.

    China doesn't use the same product. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1299807/number-of-monthly-unique-tiktok-users/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Your source is fine 👍

    Yours says that ~90% of their users are not from the US.

    Despite the US being Tiktoks largest single-country user base they still only make up a sliver of their monthly-active users.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    So just over 4% of the worlds population is making up 10% of the usage. I suppose the owners shouldn't care about that sliver of the users. They should care more about the smaller slivers, got it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Tiktok is one of the largest social media apps on earth, they're not selling it over a sliver. Why does it matter how much bigger the sliver is than the other ones? Are you stupid?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago

    "TikTok" is an American Company. Their owners, ByteDance, also own a nearly identical product in china called 抖音 (Douyin). The Chinese version is much more closely operated by the military, their offices are literally military owned buildings and lots.

  • source
  • parent