While Some Top Creators Abandon TikTok, the ACLU Opposes a Ban (techcrunch.com) 135
Late Friday night, the American Civil Liberties Union tweeted its objections to banning TikTok in the United States. "Banning an app like TikTok, which millions of Americans use to communicate with each other, is a danger to free expression and technologically impractical."
More details from TechCrunch: "With any Internet platform, we should be concerned about the risk that sensitive private data will be funneled to abusive governments, including our own," the ACLU wrote in a subsequent statement. "But shutting one platform down, even if it were legally possible to do so, harms freedom of speech online and does nothing to resolve the broader problem of unjustified government surveillance."
But TechCrunch also reports TikTok is facing another threat: On Tuesday, a clutch of the company's largest celebrities, with a collective audience of some 47 million viewers, abandoned the platform for its much smaller competitor, Triller.
Founded in 2015, two years before TikTok began its explosive rise to prominence, Triller is backed by some of the biggest names in American music and entertainment including Snoop Dogg, The Weeknd, Marshmello, Lil Wayne, Juice WRLD, Young Thug, Kendrick Lamar, Baron Davis, Tyga, TI, Jake Paul and Troy Carter...
[T]he creators say they're leaving TikTok because they've grown wary of the Chinese-owned company's security practices. "After seeing the U.S. and other countries' governments' concerns over TikTok — and given my responsibility to protect and lead my followers and other influencers — I followed my instincts as an entrepreneur and made it my mission to find a solution," Richards, who's assuming the title of Triller's chief strategy officer, told the LA Times.
More details from TechCrunch: "With any Internet platform, we should be concerned about the risk that sensitive private data will be funneled to abusive governments, including our own," the ACLU wrote in a subsequent statement. "But shutting one platform down, even if it were legally possible to do so, harms freedom of speech online and does nothing to resolve the broader problem of unjustified government surveillance."
But TechCrunch also reports TikTok is facing another threat: On Tuesday, a clutch of the company's largest celebrities, with a collective audience of some 47 million viewers, abandoned the platform for its much smaller competitor, Triller.
Founded in 2015, two years before TikTok began its explosive rise to prominence, Triller is backed by some of the biggest names in American music and entertainment including Snoop Dogg, The Weeknd, Marshmello, Lil Wayne, Juice WRLD, Young Thug, Kendrick Lamar, Baron Davis, Tyga, TI, Jake Paul and Troy Carter...
[T]he creators say they're leaving TikTok because they've grown wary of the Chinese-owned company's security practices. "After seeing the U.S. and other countries' governments' concerns over TikTok — and given my responsibility to protect and lead my followers and other influencers — I followed my instincts as an entrepreneur and made it my mission to find a solution," Richards, who's assuming the title of Triller's chief strategy officer, told the LA Times.
Why would I support Tik Tok (Score:5, Interesting)
Facebook is starting up a Tik Tok competitor in a few weeks, and they seem pretty buddy-buddy with the admin. I'm sure that & the fact that Tik Tok users made a fool of the president at a rally are unrelated to these calls to ban it.
Re: (Score:3)
Why would Facebook sell your data to the PRC? Choicepoint and the CIA pay a lot more.
Re:Why would I support Tik Tok (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would Facebook sell your data to the PRC? Choicepoint and the CIA pay a lot more.
They can sell it to everyone. It's not like it goes away when they sell it, they're only selling a copy.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah ha, here's the version that should be modded insightful. (My longer comment to that effect is around here somewhere.)
Re: Why would I support Tik Tok (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe its time to start looking at the app ecosystem from another perspective. Why am I not provided fine grained control over data applications on my phone use? For instance, why can't I select the contacts that I do wish to share rather than an all or nothing approach? Why am I forced to allow GPS data instead of just allowing null or faked data to be sent? Why am I forced to allow my app to read IMEI numbers and not (again) allow customized control over this?
Because you are the product. It suddenly
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe its time to start looking at the app ecosystem from another perspective. Why am I not provided fine grained control over data applications on my phone use? For instance, why can't I select the contacts that I do wish to share rather than an all or nothing approach? Why am I forced to allow GPS data instead of just allowing null or faked data to be sent? Why am I forced to allow my app to read IMEI numbers and not (again) allow customized control over this?
Because you are the product. It suddenly backfires when a state-sponser can also fetch the same information.
Woa there...put down the tinfoil hat for a second, and maybe go to a spelling bee or two.
First, you can fake your GPS data, android has this functionality built in. You have to enable developer options, and turn on "allow mock locations", then you can use apps like this one [google.com] to set your location to wherever you want.
Supposed privacy champion Apple doesn't allow you to do this on iOS, so if you own an iphone, you're kind of SOL.
There are ways of doing this on a per-app basis on android, but they require root,
Re: (Score:2)
There are ways of doing this on a per-app basis on android, but they require root, which pretty much means you're only going to do it on Google's first party phones
Don't all the first-tier phone vendors permit bootloader unlocking, and rooting? My understanding is that if you do this you have to be careful with firmwares and partitions, especially on Samsung devices, but it's still doable. No? I can certainly unlock my Moto X4. I'm going to soon, because they aren't doing Android 10 for it.
Re: (Score:2)
Why am I not provided fine grained control over data applications on my phone use? For instance, why can't I select the contacts that I do wish to share rather than an all or nothing approach? Why am I forced to allow GPS data instead of just allowing null or faked data to be sent? Why am I forced to allow my app to read IMEI numbers and not (again) allow customized control over this?
Because you own a locked-down phone, based on closed-source software.
Re: Why would I support Tik Tok (Score:1)
Android is open source. iOS allows much finer grained controls like that.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course we do have incredible levels of control and most of the control means choosing not to get something for "free" because if they aren't selling you a product then you are the product. Of course most apps will not be available for free unless free means free of cash and you only pay with your data. Go see how many free news webpages you get to see with your adblocker enabled.
Re: (Score:2)
Null GPS data could be interesting.
GPS coordinates 0,0 are off the west coast of Africa somewhere. As drones become more common I expect within some years we will find a large graveyard of wrecked ships and aircraft whose autopilots navigated to 0,0 and then ran out of fuel.
KIDS (Keep It Diversion, Stupid) (Score:5, Interesting)
The FP should be modded funny (irony), though it is a moderately productive opening to the conversation. For example, I noticed a reply about selling the data to the high bidder, which could have been insightful if it had gone the next step. These days there's no reason Tik Tok can't sell a copy of the data to every bidder. Of course the real insight would have to get to the underlying principle of why human beings no longer have any right to control their own personal information.
However, I think all of those aspects are missing the main boat. The key word for this topic is diversion, and I knew it wasn't in the discussion (with 30 comments so far) as soon as I got to the third character of the search. This is just another attempt to change the subject to keep everyone off balance. Also some blame shifting, with the amusing wrinkle that no one has yet produced any evidence Tik Tok has actually done anything to be blamed for. "Look over there! Look at Tik Tok! It's all Jhina's fault! You can't blame me and I don't take responsibility at all." Weirdest and worst excuse for a president ever. Yes, only the last part is a real quote (and the double entendre is deliberate). Can you even remember the last five diversions? How about the top five for July? Why settle for fake outrage when you can have the real thing?
Innovation is supposed to be a good thing. NIH (Not Invented Here) is supposed to be a losing and wasteful defensive tactic. So much for principles. Now it's "Tik Tok is Chinese = bad." And I admit that I don't use Tik Tok so I don't really know how innovative it is. Based on all the stuff I had read about Tik Tok I had no interest in using Tik Tok, but now I'm getting kind of curious. Shades of Streisand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] ?
But this Tik Tok ban is just another diversion. If there is something wrong with the abuse of personal information, then the first place to start is by figuring out what sort of crime it is and passing the appropriate laws with the appropriate penalties. Then you have to enforce those laws on everyone, including companies from every country and without regard to political considerations. Lady Justice is not blindfolded just so you can bash her in the head more easily, though these days she has to lose the blindfold to see whose thumb is on the scales. (But we already know whose thumb it is.)
Does remind me of an old joke, however. Best version I could find quickly (plus my feeble extension to China):
In Germany everything that is not allowed is forbidden..
In America everything is allowed that is not forbidden.
In France everything is allowed, especially if it is forbidden.
In Russia everything is forbidden, even if it is allowed.
In China everything that is not allowed is a futile foreign plot against China.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Also some blame shifting, with the amusing wrinkle that no one has yet produced any evidence Tik Tok has actually done anything to be blamed for.
That's because nerds are expected to be able to use google to inform themselves. e.g. https://www.forbes.com/sites/z... [forbes.com] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/te... [telegraph.co.uk] https://www.usatoday.com/story... [usatoday.com]
TL;DR: TikTok has been caught employing spying methods (e.g. clipboard access) even after they claimed they stopped, and their story as to why has changed even though their behavior hasn't. That's a sure sign that they are spying. It is well-known both inside and outside of China that the PRC embeds operatives in any Chine
Re: (Score:2)
Why single out TikTok though? Here's all the other apps doing it, most of them American:
ABC News â" com.abcnews.ABCNews
Al Jazeera English â" ajenglishiphone
CBC News â" ca.cbc.CBCNews
CBS News â" com.H443NM7F8H.CBSNews
CNBC â" com.nbcuni.cnbc.cnbcrtipad
Fox News â" com.foxnews.foxnews
News Break â" com.particlenews.newsbreak
New York Times â" com.nytimes.NYTimes
NPR â" org.npr.nprnews
ntv Nachrichten â" de.n-tv.n-tvmobil
Reuters â" com.thomsonreuters.Reuters
Russ
Re: (Score:2)
You weren't clear on your context, but I saw something about clipboard abuse by Tik Tok somewhere in this discussion. Therefore I'm guessing that you are listing apps that may have been harvesting personal information via the clipboard problem. Or maybe I missed the context from the obvious trollage? (That's one of the problems with posting that kind of ad hominem garbage [from 153816 this time]. People may ignore possibly valid bits embedded in the tripe.)
My take on the clipboard problem is mixed. Bad, ye
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, massive mistake.
In Trumpistan you're guilty until you have the right friend.
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm, I might still have AliExpress on one of my devices. I've found eBay to be the best place to buy anything that fits in a box, though. I'm always hesitant to spend much though AliExpress. The sleaziest I've gone has been DealExtreme...
Public masturbation of 153816 (Score:1)
Z^-1
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't see a lot of Chinese ads on Facebook.
That is because your data indicates that you aren't interested.
I have friends, relatives, and co-workers in China. I send and receive FB posts in Hanzi.
I see plenty of ads for Chinese stuff.
You have the right to choose (Score:2)
I'll go along with the ACLU on the "US can't ban TikTok", except for those who work for the government.
Of course, we ALL work for the government on the revenue side...
Re: (Score:2)
I find that the ACLU's stance is quite interesting along with several others. Personal favorite right now? The demand to ban body cameras from police.
Re: (Score:2)
I find that the ACLU's stance is quite interesting along with several others. Personal favorite right now? The demand to ban body cameras from police.
Got a link? Last time I looked, the ACLU was demanding that only certain body camera data be available to the public, but not trying to ban police body cameras.
Re: You have the right to choose (Score:1)
https://www.aclu.org/press-rel... [aclu.org]
Re: (Score:2)
That article is about a ban on facial recognition software on police body cameras.
I'd rather get better cops that could be trusted to use complex tools, because facial recognition is going to be built into ray-bans and whatnot eventually. I'm shit with names, I'd like that feature. I want it in Oakleys though. I can't find anything else that's durable and also fits my head, and where I can get tons of aftermarket lenses cheap.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.aclu-wa.org/docs/a... [aclu-wa.org]
This one is a bit more interesting, because they're against live streaming. Which really they should be for, since it's fully in the court of public opinion.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news... [msn.com]
Re: You have the right to choose (Score:1)
The ACLU for the last 5 years or so has been anti-cop, they donâ(TM)t want the body cams anymore wherever they can be used to catch criminals, they are only interested in body cams when it can be used to free criminals.
Re: (Score:2)
Remember when BLM was new and shiny, and they demanded body cameras on all police? I sure do. Then suddenly in the span of a year, it was "body cams bad."
The ACLU has been shit for quite a while. But their "we'll only defend the rights of certain people" was the nail in the coffin for them.
Constitutional basis for a ban? (Score:3, Interesting)
Making no comment on the security of Tik-Tok or any deeper goals of the creators thereof, what would be the Constitutional and legal basis for banning an everyday software application? The only thing that comes close would be ITAR, but first there would have to be a determination that a sarcastic video app is a "weapon".
I'm sure the guys who go around with pocket Constitutions and read them... once a day ..will come up with something though.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
technologically impractical (Score:1, Insightful)
Haha. Now the ACLU is an expert on technology. I can see the point about harming freedom of speech, though the ACLU hasn't seemed too concerned about banning voices seen as right wing from Twitter, YouTube, or Facebook, or muzzling people in universities. But now they know what is practical in technology? Just wondering, maybe they can also tell me what stocks I should be buying?
Re: technologically impractical (Score:4, Informative)
Ignorance doesn't become you.
Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook are PRIVATE companies. The First Amendment doesn't apply to their actions in choosing who to publish on their platforms.
The President is the figurehead for the US Government. The First Amendment specifically applies to his actions in trying to muzzle the speech of US Citizens.
The ACLU would be interested in the second situation, but not the first.
Re: technologically impractical (Score:4, Informative)
It's a foreign platform, technically the 1st amendment doesn't apply. Keep in mind that this is a tit-for-tat against China, which bans ALL non-native apps, programs, and whatnot from operating in China.
Re: (Score:2)
Tit-for-tats are still limited by what is constitutionally permissible. Muzzling Americans to hurt a Chinese company, IMHO, is NOT permissible.
Re: (Score:2)
Well then, you should know that this will likely be based around IP theft, and violations of trade agreements.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump is really in no place to whine about violation of trade agreements, but otherwise it's a great idea. You could have squads of plainclothes secret police grab people using tik-tok off the street and render them to secret prisons!
Re: (Score:2)
Mostly true. But then again, I live in a country that heavily trades with the US and have seen just how my own country has benefited by pissing on trade deals until it became an actual issue.
I find your last sentence amusing though. Who knew a person wearing full gear with a unit insignia is secret police.
Re: (Score:2)
Here in Canada the US has been ignoring (for just one example) rulings on softwood lumber by the WTO since long before Trump came to power. He has just doubled down with tariffs on steel and aluminium amongst others. They are necessarily our largest trading partner by way of geography, but the one good thing Trump has done (inadvertently of course) is drive home how important it is for this country to diversify our trading relationships elsewhere as protection against future Trump-like regimes. I'm glad
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah it's a common mistake to think that the bill of rights is a list of things granted by the government to citizens and therefore doesn't apply abroad.
That is wrong. The rights of the People are inherent. The constitution is actually the powers the People grant the government. The bill of rights is just a clarification of "in case government gets any funny ideas, let's just make some things crystal clear."
That's why the 1st Amendment doesn't say "The government grants the People the right to free speec
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It's a foreign platform, technically the 1st amendment doesn't apply. Keep in mind that this is a tit-for-tat against China, which bans ALL non-native apps, programs, and whatnot from operating in China.
Afaik the tiktok app is released by a US company.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't understand what you're trying to show me? My point is that since TikTok is distributed by a US company, the company it has rights and obligations according to US law. This applies even when ownership is Chinese and development happens in China.
Re: (Score:2)
It's distributed in the US by a holding company. It however is still bound by the laws of China. The law in China states that any company must be partially held in trust by the CCP. On top of that the national security law in China passed in 2017 grants them the full right to demand any data held by any company, anywhere in the world regardless of who is distributing it without the requirement of notification for legal right or acknowledgement to the subsidiary or distributor.
Simply this, if the CCP says
Re: (Score:2)
It's distributed in the US by a holding company. It however is still bound by the laws of China. The law in China states that any company must be partially held in trust by the CCP. On top of that the national security law in China passed in 2017 grants them the full right to demand any data held by any company, anywhere in the world regardless of who is distributing it without the requirement of notification for legal right or acknowledgement to the subsidiary or distributor.
Simply this, if the CCP says "give us all your shit and don't tell anyone" they have to hand over all their shit, and not tell the distributor that they've don it. In which case, your only chance of knowing if that happens would be a whistle blower. And in China they put those types of people either in prison and reeducation or in a grave.
Spin it anyway you like, US holding company has rights and obligations according to US law. If all data from Chinese owned companies get funneled to the CCP, why does a kids app with dancing underage girls get singled out? It doesn't even seem to be a case of "think of the children", I just don't get it. (inb4 Huawei, there I can see the specific problem).
Re: (Score:2)
That's not spinning anything, that's all cold hard reality. The part you fail to understand is that tik-tok isn't a kids app, far from it. Which is probably why you don't get why this is a problem, when you have an app that wants geo-location data and happily sends your phones unique identifier along with your account information.
Re: (Score:2)
That's not spinning anything, that's all cold hard reality. The part you fail to understand is that tik-tok isn't a kids app, far from it. Which is probably why you don't get why this is a problem, when you have an app that wants geo-location data and happily sends your phones unique identifier along with your account information.
Having a look at the tiktok webpage, I give you that it might have a bit broader appeal as there was more of a variety in age than I thought, but I still don't get why this app where people are performing skits are a bigger problem than the alibaba app to take a concrete example? Tiktok doesn't require permission to geolocation https://play.google.com/store/... [google.com] while alibaba does https://play.google.com/store/... [google.com] (but I don't know if this is a recent change). The alibaba app requires permission to:
Location
p
Re: (Score:2)
That's not true, lots of American apps are available in China. Most Apple apps are, for example. Bing and related apps are too.
Re: (Score:2)
No it is true. Sanitized apps are allowed in China, they allow no foreign apps though. Those sanitized apps also have to be produce in China, and have to go through official government sanction to be allowed.
Re: technologically impractical (Score:2)
The president does have the power to ban the app within its branch.
This has wide reaching impacts because a lot of companies depend on government contracts. Through NIH and NSF a lot of private Universities are funded.
The problem with TikTok is that it had been caught stealing data already, keeping it away from government-paid assets is a good thing.
If you donâ(TM)t agree with government mandating Universities and private business the government contracted with, you should be fighting the source proble
Re: (Score:2)
Publish. As you said, they are a publisher in that they pick winners and losers and edit content. This means they lose DMCA section 230 protection.
They are also overwhelmingly a monopoly. This makes them subject to RAND, which stands for Reasonable And Non Discriminatory. That means they arenâ(TM)t allowed to pick winners and losers. This makes them like a utility, like a phone company or the USPS. They have to offer the same service to all people without bias.
RAND is quite arguably the most precedente
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I can see the point about harming freedom of speech, though the ACLU hasn't seemed too concerned about banning voices seen as right wing from Twitter, YouTube, or Facebook,
You see to be misconstruing the issue or just being obtuse.
Each platform gets to choose it's users to use it you must agree to abide by a contract (ToS). However, TikTok is abiding by their contracts so banning them is an overt act of the US government. TikTok has no contracts with the US government but now the US government is seeking to prohibit them which could be seen as a free speech issue.
Frankly, I would classify this as a national security issue, not a free speech issue.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Are you truly unaware that the ACLU has on many occasions defended free speech on behalf of the Ku Klux Klan and other far right organizations? They've even stuck up for Rush Limbaugh.
I am so sick and tired of whiny little conservative bitches perpetually pretending they're victims. The only free speech the right actually care about is its own.
Perhaps some Slashdotters might be interested in these examples of the ACLU standing up strong for free speech, even when that speech consists largely of racist r
Re: technologically impractical (Score:4, Informative)
https://www.axios.com/aclu-lea... [axios.com]
Re: (Score:2)
And if you don’t believe our words, judge us by our acts. We represent Milo Yiannopoulos in a suit against the Washington, D.C. Metro system for suppressing ads for his book....[etc]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. They went to bat for that Yiannopoulos jackass. And there's lots of other cases, too.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: technologically impractical (Score:1)
Canâ(TM)t upset the narrative about peaceful protests now can we.
What grounds for a TikTok ban? (Score:2)
What I don't understand is, are we really considering banning or dropping TikTok because it MAYBE was collecting pasteboard contents? Because that's the only complaint I have seen so far.
TikTok has already fixed that because of iOS 14 throwing warnings every time an app accesses externally pasted content. The supposed danger is that it maybe could get access to desktop pasteboard data also because iOS allows you to share desktop and mobile pasteboards... but since that's fixed, there no danger remaining.
Re:What grounds for a TikTok ban? (Score:5, Insightful)
The issue, as I understand it, isn't so much that the information collected can be used directly. It's that the information can be used to collect dossiers on every American citizen that make both spying as well as attacks against the US possible.
Spying is enabled when you know everything about everyone. You want to find someone who works at Wright-Patterson AFB in the flight operations center who might be susceptible to blackmail, bribery, or sexual coercion? How about an engine design engineer who works at SpaceX? Having a database with 300 million Americans, including social network information like where they work, who they know, what kind of porn they watch, their financial situation, what kind of opinions they've expressed, makes this much easier.
Direct attacks (non-Military) are enabled similarly. If you want the US to elect Donald Trump, you identify the influencers - not necessarily the bling-coated surface beauties, but the Aunt Martha's who forward everything that they agree with and think their family and friends should read. You craft messages that correlate with their beliefs, and expose them - and get a hundred times leverage from their social network. And as the 2016 (and possibly 2020) elections showed, this kind of effort can have an effect - and doesn't require that the Donald Trump's of the world even know that it's going on.
Also possible with any social media app (Score:2)
It's that the information can be used to collect dossiers on every American citizen that make both spying as well as attacks against the US possible
Although I see what you are saying here, I'm still dubious that the tool being used in this way, is any different for TikTok than for any other social media app where you share video.
If everyone switched to some other social media platform you could still simply absorb all feed and use facial recognition to gather the same kinds of data as TikTok would be gathe
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
If they were serious, they would ban WeChat,
I agree but would even go further, and say if they were REALLY serious they would ban government employees from using social media altogether.... but I don't think it would have great compliance so is probably not realistic.
Re: (Score:2)
Should be modded up, probably insightful. However it mostly triggered my paranoid conspiracy nightmares. Maybe Putin ordered Trump to go after Tik Tok because he doesn't want the Chinese muscling in on his turf? Even worse, at this point I'd bet the Russian intelligence services know more about what's really going on in China than America does.
And yeah, my evidence is mostly anecdotal. Every time I talk to a Trump supporter it's like they must have been micro-targeted with some specific bit of insane BS. Di
Re: (Score:1)
You've provided no evidence, anecdotal or otherwise you fuckwit.
We know that The Donald was forced to go to Russia for money after Douche Bank finally gave him the boot, because DJTJ told the world. We know that Russia plays hardball. We know that Russia interfered with our electoral process, and that ol' Trumpykins stuck up for Putin. Do you need someone to draw you a map before you can find your ass with both hands?
Re: (Score:1)
If you can get shanen's cock out of your mouth for long enough
Guess you didn't read this comment [slashdot.org], did you?
maybe YOU can provide some evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, that Putin ordered Trump to go after Tik Tok because he doesn't want the Chinese muscling in on his turf.
Be patient. Putin doesn't tip his hand easily, but Trump does.
While I support the ACLU's principles here... (Score:1)
... fuck TikTok. They should ban every social network.
Re: While I support the ACLU's principles here... (Score:2)
Yes, somebody might get 'triggered'.
Ban all kinds of communication.
Now line up for your mandatory ball gag and iron mask installation.
Re: (Score:1)
Ban all kinds of communication.
No, not all kinds of communication, just the ones whose business strategy is a thinly veiled excuse for harvesting children.
Biggest names in enterternment what? (Score:5, Insightful)
biggest names in American music and entertainment including Snoop Dogg, The Weeknd, Marshmello, Lil Wayne, Juice WRLD, Young Thug, Kendrick Lamar, Baron Davis, Tyga, TI, Jake Paul and Troy Carter.
I'm sorry but... who the fuck are these people?
Well, maybe I know Snoop Dog...
Re: (Score:2)
The Weeknd is Canadian
Re: Biggest names in enterternment what? (Score:2)
Those are the types of idiots who use Thottok in the first place.
This may come as a shock to you (Score:5, Insightful)
As usual the Simpsons addressed this phenomenon. [youtu.be]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's probably what Trump thought when he decided to ban TikTok. I'm sure banning a whole generation's favourite app will encourage them to vote for them.
Re: (Score:2)
So rappers and two white guys?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not complaining, I just have no idea who they are :)
I don't live in a cave, I've seen and listened to newer artists and entertainers. But I have no clue who that lot is. Never heard of 'em.
Re: Biggest names in enterternment what? (Score:2)
If there is no Bing Crosby, I ain't using "social media".
Simple Solution (Score:5, Funny)
Parsing their statement (Score:2)
ACLU's statement objects to shutting down one platform; Does that mean shutting more than one would make it acceptable?
ACLU Hypocrisy FTW (Score:1)
The organization declares that speech it doesn’t like can ‘inflict serious harms’ and ‘impede progress.’ [wsj.com]
“ACLU repudiates free-speech principles,” former ACLU board member Michael Myers told [nytimes.com] the New York Times.
Sadly, when the ACLU finds itself on the wrong side of any leftist group, it’s totally useless.
Re: (Score:1)
I would vote in favor of this motion, but the ACLU has deemed my vote to be hate speech and not protected.
Banning services??? Who does that??? (Score:3)
1. China ... I could list more, but I don't need to. Nice taking a play from the governments who already have done it; the same governments Trump says he's better than. Perfectly fine if companies are selling (or giving) the US data.
2. Russia
3. Pakistan
I used to be a member of (Score:2, Informative)
I put them in the same group as Southern Poverty Law Center,, Legal shills!
Re: (Score:1)
Brilliant arguing. You must be evil because you disagree with me. It's genius on the level of "Antifa is named anti-fascism so they couldn't POSSIBLY be bad!"
Political wanking (Score:2, Insightful)
This is what all the "oH nOzE! wE mUsT pRoTeCt aMeRiCa fRoM tEh eBil tIk tAc" is really all about.
Wow, if China is so evil and dangerous, surely our manufacturing base will be rushing back into the United States about now, right?
As I said, it's political wanking and possibly a cheap diversion from the real issues, such as Trump & friends holding maskless MAGA rallys, and the feds disappearing people off of the streets in Oregon.
Should lose non-profit status (Score:1)
ACLU not caring about spying? (Score:2)
Tech Crunch lives in its own world? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
ACLU (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)