this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2024
136 points (93.0% liked)

Technology

59217 readers
2773 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

You should read this https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/03/tiktok-bill-foreign-influence/677806/

Again, this is not a new concept. The Montana ban was stopped but even in that case, AFAIK the appeal isn't settled. This was also not something heard by the Montana supreme court or the US supreme court.

The national ban has also presumably been crafted by much more experienced lawyers and lawmakers than the Montana ban. Presumably folks that understand the law better than either of us.

IMO comparing a TikTok ban to some major infringement even remotely close to an authoritarian country ... it's just wrong. Freedom of association has its limits and always has. Associating with a hostile foreign power, for instance the confederate states, was not ever to my knowledge protected. The only entity that folks are being prevented from associating with here is the Chinese government.

Calling a TikTok ban an assault on the right of association is like calling Twitter moderation an assault on the right of free speech. There are other options available. Your argument would be much stronger if TikTok was a truly unique technology or platform, but it isn't. It's not even an original idea, it's a ripoff of vine that (originally) added music to the videos, made them a bit longer, and generally suffers from a lot of the same issues in terms of monetization.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The national ban has also presumably been crafted by much more experienced lawyers and lawmakers than the Montana ban. Presumably folks that understand the law better than either of us.

Unconstitutional laws are deliberately passed all the time. They happen for political reasons. For example, GOP-led state congress from various states repeatedly tried to pass abortion bans even while Roe V Wade was still active. Why? They are not stupid, they knew it would get stricken down by the courts.

The reason is a) it shows to their base they are trying to do something about abortion. It's essentially political theater.

b) by continously challenging the law, you can hope for a court case that potentially sets useful precedence for the future. For example Crawford v. Marion County Election Board in 2008. After passing many voter id laws that got repeatedly struck down, eventually it led to a court case that set a better precedence for voter id laws.

If you keep trying, eventually you get a nice ruling and all of a sudden the unconstitutional law you passed is a little less unconstitutional. So next time, you can go a little further and keep pushing the boundaries

So even though we had very strong amendments in the constitution to protect right to vote (15th amendment, 19th amendment, 24th amendment, 26th amendment) by repeatedly challenging those amendments by passing unconstitutional laws, the GOP has effectively managed to bypass the constitution in many states by passing voter id laws that have the simple purpose of getting blacks to vote less

They infringe upon rights the constitution explicitly gives to the citizens by sheer persistence.

IMO comparing a TikTok ban to some major infringement even remotely close to an authoritarian country ... it's just wrong

The reason it's authoritarian is because the government is playing that game I mentioned above. It's clear this law has nothing to do with data collection.

They are using that justification because they don't have any legal leg to stand on if they named the real reason - they want to ban specific content. Instead, they claim they are content neutral and are doing it for national security.

So they are deliberately bending the boundaries of the law in order to reduce personal freedoms and give the government more control over the media that shows up on your screen.

If this isn't a step towards authoritarianism, I don't know what is. The DNC is now holding hands with the GOP as they continue to degrade the remainder of legitimacy that American democratic institutions have left while marching towards WW3

And you and many others in this thread are cheering it on, letting your xenophobia be used as a tool to consolidate power by the federal government

[–] [email protected] -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If you can't separate the CCP from the Chinese people, there's something very wrong with your moral compass.

It's right up there with calling someone antisemitic for criticizing Israel.

I'm done with this conversation. I can't take you seriously after that xenophobia comment.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Nice deflection. A jingoist with a sense of moral superiority. Yeah, OK.