'What If They Ban TikTok and People Keep Using It Anyway?' (yahoo.com) 100
"What if they ban TikTok and people keep using it anyway?" asks the New York Times, saying a pending ban in America "is vague on how it would be enforced"
Some experts say that even if TikTok is actually banned this month or soon, there may be so many legal and technical loopholes that millions of Americans could find ways to keep TikTok'ing. The law is "Swiss cheese with lots of holes in it," said Glenn Gerstell, a former top lawyer at the National Security Agency and a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a policy research organization. "There are obviously ways around it...." When other countries ban apps, the government typically orders internet providers and mobile carriers to block web traffic to and from the blocked website or app. That's probably not how a ban on TikTok in the United States would work. Two lawyers who reviewed the law said the text as written doesn't appear to order internet and mobile carriers to stop people from using TikTok.
There may not be unanimity on this point. Some lawyers who spoke to Bloomberg News said internet providers would be in legal hot water if they let their customers continue to use a banned TikTok. Alan Rozenshtein, a University of Minnesota associate law professor, said he suspected internet providers aren't obligated to stop TikTok use "because Congress wanted to allow the most dedicated TikTok users to be able to access the app, so as to limit the First Amendment infringement." The law also doesn't order Americans to stop using TikTok if it's banned or to delete the app from our phones....
Odds are that if the Supreme Court declares the TikTok law constitutional and if a ban goes into effect, blacklisting the app from the Apple and Google app stores will be enough to stop most people from using TikTok... If a ban goes into effect and Apple and Google block TikTok from pushing updates to the app on your phone, it may become buggy or broken over time. But no one is quite sure how long it would take for the TikTok app to become unusable or compromised in this situation.
Users could just sideload the app after downloading it outside a phone's official app store, the article points out. (More than 10 million people sideloaded Fortnite within six weeks of its removal from Apple and Google's app stores.) And there's also the option of just using a VPN — or watching TikTok's web site.
(I've never understood why all apps haven't already been replaced with phone-optimized web sites...)
There may not be unanimity on this point. Some lawyers who spoke to Bloomberg News said internet providers would be in legal hot water if they let their customers continue to use a banned TikTok. Alan Rozenshtein, a University of Minnesota associate law professor, said he suspected internet providers aren't obligated to stop TikTok use "because Congress wanted to allow the most dedicated TikTok users to be able to access the app, so as to limit the First Amendment infringement." The law also doesn't order Americans to stop using TikTok if it's banned or to delete the app from our phones....
Odds are that if the Supreme Court declares the TikTok law constitutional and if a ban goes into effect, blacklisting the app from the Apple and Google app stores will be enough to stop most people from using TikTok... If a ban goes into effect and Apple and Google block TikTok from pushing updates to the app on your phone, it may become buggy or broken over time. But no one is quite sure how long it would take for the TikTok app to become unusable or compromised in this situation.
Users could just sideload the app after downloading it outside a phone's official app store, the article points out. (More than 10 million people sideloaded Fortnite within six weeks of its removal from Apple and Google's app stores.) And there's also the option of just using a VPN — or watching TikTok's web site.
(I've never understood why all apps haven't already been replaced with phone-optimized web sites...)
Does it matter? (Score:5, Insightful)
Tiktok, youtube, whatever are not about "the people", they are about "monetization". As long as something is banned and therefore avoided by advertisers and not allowed to take in money, it won't pay its users, and they'll dissipate.
The value is in the network of users (Score:4, Insightful)
The value of a social networking tool is in the network of users, not in the networking software. People are on TikTok because OTHER people are on TikTok. (In the reducto ad absurdum case, t's completely useless if you're the only one on it)
It's a positive feedback loop. If you make it hard for other people to get on TikTok, and only people who have enough tech sophistication to get around the gates are using it, it will die (or, rather, turn into a niche application that's essentially a secret clubhouse that only a small handful of tech-sophisticated people use.)
Re:The value is in the network of users (Score:4, Funny)
"Networking" is so 2010... There is no tiktok user who is there to "network", everyone is there to get famous and rich.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
You have an unusual amount of faith in the Supreme Court. History seems to prove that they make their decisions mainly on political grounds, and then justify it by twisting the Constitution unreasonably. To pick a notorious example, why are the Feds allowed to ban you growing something on your own property for your own use? Because they wanted to make the ban, so they twisted it until they could.
Re: (Score:2)
"Networking" is so 2010... There is no tiktok user who is there to "network", everyone is there to get famous and rich.
If there's nobody to view the TikToks, nobody's going to post them. They know they're not going to get famous and rich if only a dozen people are there to see their videos.
Re: (Score:2)
Next you gonna tell me pyramid schemes are also "networking", right? Technically, I suppose, they are :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: The value is in the network of users (Score:2)
A few years back toktok introduced the short videos and vertical video as mainstream.
This was a major boon to its users, whose attention spans are on the order of a minute and who do not like to hold their smart phones horizontally.
Re: (Score:2)
So, more like the pre-web usenet, only with video? I'm not seeing the downside.
Re: (Score:2)
It's about people. That's where value proposition is. And if app gets banned, people will just use the website which is sanctioned but not banned (unless they go after ISPs, which is technically possible).
There's no language in the relevant law
https://www.congress.gov/bill/... [congress.gov]
that targets advertisers.
Re: (Score:2)
What "law" are we talking about here?
I still remember 2010, when most payment providers shut down the accounts of Wikileaks because of a letter they got from the State Department.
The US president was officially absolved of any wrongdoing just a few months ago. The incoming one has officially told foreign countries far and wide that US doesn't recognize their sovereignty.
Even the barest smokescreen of some "law" that the US government adheres to is now gone completely, there is no longer difference between y
Re: Sideload (Score:1)
Missing the purpose entirely (Score:1)
This isn't about "the people". This is really about banning Tiktok from government devices. If you want to scroll your life away on stupid videos no one is going to stop you.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, you can also find 90% of the popular TikTok crap on YouTube Shorts if you really want to watch it. Even if the service dies, the content will not.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
"This is really about banning Tiktok from government devices."
No it isn't. TFA calls into question the enforcement, why would the military need to rely on legislation for this? The ban is about preventing people from getting information outside of a curated bubble (the likes of whoch Meta's platforms provide), and Israel's lobby is a prime mover in the push. People on the left salivating for the ban are especially pathetic (becaude they should know better)
Re: (Score:2)
No, not any of that bullshit you just said.
Re:Missing the purpose entirely (Score:4, Insightful)
If that was the case they would have just made a rule for government devices which is easy to enforce since they are locked down. Maybe an additional policy that bans it from your personal devices if you hold a collateral clearance. Banning it on mass is simple China fear mongering plus the desire to put in a wedge that allows further Internet controls. Pretty soon we'll have our very own great internet firewall just like the China everyone is fear mongering about.
Re: (Score:2)
Not all that easy, and it's not just government devices, it's devices on government property. Like military bases. Much of the hardware is personal stuff. (But, yeah, for that subset, the military could handle it themselves, if they wanted to.) But also embassies, and lots of other sensitive government owned areas.
OTOH, typically they solve this kind of problem with massive overreach, and that may be what they've done this time. Then they'll engage in targeted enforcement (which is illegal, but they do
Re: (Score:2)
I've worked in secure rooms on military bases. You aren't even allowed to bring in anything that is capable of emitting RF or writable media, let alone a personal device like a cell phone. I got warned once for reading my kindle in a waiting room while the G8 commandeered the work room we needed. When I had to update a server with a new software release, I would need to sign out of the building and go burn a CDR in my car on my laptop, since neither my laptop nor thumb drives were allowed inside. If the
Re: (Score:2)
LOL this is just chicken little nonsense.
They did make a rule about banning it from government devices. Now they are going to make it a law.
Since it is obviously operating as an agent of Chinese military propaganda like they say it is then who actually gives a shit about what you think? It's hilarious how desperate you are to scroll an algorithm designed to feed you politics, outrage and bias. What an amazing intellect you are!
Banning it en-masse means that maybe you should pull your head out and breathe a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've never used Tik Tok. Never even seen the app first hand as no one I know uses it. I just don't think the government should be in the business of banning it. If an idiot government employee might misuse something is a good reason to ban something, then a whole lot of apps and technology need to get banned in addition to Tik Tok.
I'd personally rather not live in that kind of world.
Re: (Score:2)
Time for you to learn the purpose of government then.
Re: (Score:2)
Can't imagine why anyone would come here for "news". Seeking out reliable sources of information will be the great struggle of our age.
If you actually think you're getting unbiased news from TikTok then you're just hopeless.
Re: Missing the purpose entirely (Score:2)
They won't get advertisers (Score:2)
If they want to burn terabytes per second from servers outside the US without any income, they can feel free.
I've never understood why all apps haven't alread (Score:4, Informative)
Because apps have access to now data on your phone that can be sent back. Websites can't see what other apps you have installed, for example. Or a list of all your contacts. What's apps need permissions due a lot of stuff, many of these apps will have more permissions to access stuff on your phone than you realise. And certainly more access than a website.
Profiling. Customer data.
Remember, YOU are the product, not the customer.
Re: I've never understood why all apps haven't alr (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Bzzt, not technically correct.
Re: I've never understood why all apps haven't al (Score:1)
What is the commenter's rationale that the calculator app should be a remote website and not a local program running on the CPU in their hand?
Re: (Score:3)
Steve Jobs originally thought all apps would be web apps. But app stores can and do function as an advertiser and marketplace. People often search their app store for the app instead of searching the internet. It's the same reason why people crowdfund on Kickstarter or Indiegogo instead of just putting up a web site and asking for funding.
Also web sites often employ advertising through networks, so it's not like a web app is a bastion of privacy. Users might even be safer using mobile apps than web apps, bu
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe Jobs thought apps would be web apps. The companies that I worked for at that time definitely did. But the Appification of the iPhone, then every application on every phone everywhere, happened. We (the techies) were in disbelief that the "open" web was being encroached upon by the "closed" apps... but that is what happened. The app store, is an app. People generally don't think beyond the sandbox.
The hilarity of course, is the cyclic nature of
Re: (Score:2)
You seem to have forgotten a lot of history. When the iPhone first launched, there were no third-party apps... at all. The idea was that "The browser IS the computer." and applications... all applications... would be HTML5 web apps moving forward and stand-alone compiled applications were to be a thing of the past.
And the collected masses completely flipped their shit. It was the usual "Apple is controlling." and "You don't own the device if you can't install anything end everything from the dankest corn
So far as I can tell (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:The real reason they want to ban tiktok (Score:5, Informative)
For reference, here is how much we’ve given Israel. https://www.cfr.org/article/us... [cfr.org]
Fiscal conservatives feel free to chime in here.
Re: (Score:2)
Fiscal conservatives feel free to chime in here.
Sure thing. I'm an Ayn Rand loving objectivist who wants a strict separation between government and the economy like we have between church and state. Taxes are theft.
Now, Israel itself is a VERY contentious hot topic for a number of reasons that would poison this conversation. So I'm going to abstract Israel to be "allies" instead. The specifics of the Israel/Palestinian conflict, the history, NONE of that matters with respects to what we are talking about from a foreign aid / fiscal conservative point of
Re: (Score:2)
Re: The real reason they want to ban tiktok (Score:2)
It's nice that you choose to abstract Israel as simply "allies" but that is not what the people who make these decisions do. Also how is that working out in practice, is democracy improving in Israel?
ticktock on tiktok (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
should bitedance just change the name to toktik and would the legal rulling still apply?
toktik... or lemon8 [slashdot.org]?
Re: (Score:2)
Government control is the reason (Score:1, Troll)
The ban is because the US government can't get data from or manipulate content on the TikTok platform. They have full access to see, lock down or manipulate anything on Instagram, Facebook, X etc. We saw that with the Covid censoring and Biden laptop issues. TikTok does not let them have that level of access into the backend. That level of control is reserved for CCP. That should be a concern but really can't justify shutting down the entire system
Re: (Score:1)
We saw that with the Covid censoring and Biden laptop issues.
Quite the opposite, we are seeing that with elona and zuck bowing to the convicted felon in the white house.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't sound like the opposite. I believe the saying is "same shit, different pile" with the proviso that one pile was a declared emergency and the other is vague threats and intimidation.
Re: (Score:2)
The Trump Amicus brief is mostly about letting him make the decision. The Biden administration has already made the decision with regard to TikTok and Trump does not want the law to be deemed unconstitutional because he wants the power. The party of the president is irrelevant the Democrats did not have to vote for the law that puts us in this situation. They care about government authority not party.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure a lot of people would disagree on that. I could be mistaken, but my impression is, that "concern" is the exact justification of this whole charade.
Re: (Score:3)
I do not think so. I think the primary reason is that el Bunko got everyone "concerned" about China "manipulating" public opinion through control of ByteDance. This allowed all the McMaggots in Congress and even the Democrats to show how they truly "cared" about Americans. Apparently it okay for Xitter to become a right wingnik/Nazi billboard but those naughty Chinese, them are what we really need to worry about.
And if el Bunko really cared about the Chinese, he wouldn't have his tat built there. So far he'
seize the site (Score:2)
Forcing ISPs to block it is a bad idea, because what else will they force ISPs to block? Disinformation about Hunter's laptop, maybe?
The thing to do is what they do with other illegal activity: seize the website, which is done by seizing the domain. Next time you access TikTok's IP address, you get a message from DoJ.
Re: (Score:2)
Enforcement won't be easy or consequent-free (Score:4, Interesting)
Enforcing a TikTok ban is not going to be easy, but I think it is doable. Yanking it from app stores might slow down new downloads, but it won’t stop existing users or workarounds like sideloading. To actually curb TikTok’s influence is going to require a mix of approaches.
I think the key is demonetization. Cut off ad revenue from U.S. companies and block payouts to creators, and you shrink TikTok’s ecosystem. Add financial sanctions to prevent ByteDance from operating through U.S. banks, and things will get serious in the ByteDance boardrooms (not to mention Beijing.) App store bans and financial restrictions together could deliver the biggest punch—stopping growth while starving the platform of cash.
Network-level blocking sounds good on paper, but it’s messy to implement and easy to bypass. Data localization or algorithm audits? Legally thorny and harder to enforce. The real challenge is balancing national security with the economic fallout for U.S. based creators.
The Act's broad language allows for a range of interventions to safeguard national security. Whatever enforcement mechanisms are chosen, there is going to be collateral damage and unintended consequences, but a combined approach targeting its growth and revenue is (probably) the most realistic way forward that would minimize the negative side-effects. If the collapse of Vine, mySpace, and Geocities is any indication, Tiktok influencers financially impacted by the ban will probably just relocate, dragging their momentarily disgruntled herds of followers with them.
Re:Enforcement won't be easy or consequent-free (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Aside from my other objections to the ban, has it occurred to you that the cultural and technological reliance that the rest of the world has had on the US over the last few decades may reverse in the next 20-30 years, and that such bans that shut out competition will instead help other countries do the same with the US?
That's an interesting, if flawed, conjecture, and to answer your question, yes, it has occurred to me. Been thinking about that a lot, actually. Let's do this by the numbers.
First, your use of the word 'reliance' to describe the relationship between the U.S. and the rest of the world in terms of cultural and technological innovation is misleading. It frames the U.S. as some sort of indispensable provider, ignoring the fact that global innovation has been a two-way street for decades. This reliance you descr
Re: (Score:2)
"It frames the U.S. as some sort of indispensable provider"
Yes, it is a reliance, but not a chosen one for them since the US is a forced provider. It's cultural hegemony. Look at Japan's common use of English in its pop culture. Why do you think China limits the number of American movies that are allowed to show there per year?
Technological hegemony as well, or do you think that English being the initial default for standards like character encodings was a choice for all of its vassal, excuse me, client sta
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it is a reliance, but not a chosen one for them since the US is a forced provider. It's cultural hegemony. Look at Japan's common use of English in its pop culture. Why do you think China limits the number of American movies that are allowed to show there per year?
"Forced provider"? That is a stretch. Sure, the U.S. has been a dominant force in culture and technology, but calling it "forced" downplays how much other countries willingly adopt and adapt what works for them. Japan's use of English in pop culture isn't coercion—it's globalization. And China's restriction on American movies isn't just about resisting cultural influence; it's also about propping up their own domestic industries. This isn't hegemony, it's countries making choices within a global marke
Re: (Score:2)
"The U.S. banning TikTok over security concerns is nowhere near the scale or intent of China's internet controls."
If you think this stops with tiktok, you're in for a surprise. Telegram is obviously next.
Re: (Score:2)
TikTok is a product of TikTok, inc. -a Los Angeles California, USA based corporation (owned by ByteDance of Beijing, China).
ByteDance can open a new company in another country easily enough to continue providing similar services beyond the reach of the US government, but TikTok the US government can reach -physically and legally it is a US corporation.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need to block 100% to kill TikTok in the US
Remove bytedance apps from US app stores
Have US ISPs and US cloud providers blackhole DNS for bytedance domains
Have US ISPs and US cloud providers blackhole public IP spaces owned by bytedance
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/co... [wsj.com]
Balkanization of Internet (Score:3)
What we are seeing is one more step in the balkanization of the internet where what you have access to depends on where you live. You have China's "Great Firewall" and many other countries block particular sources. Now the United States is officially joining the fray, largely because our control of the larger internet is starting to slip.The "national security" demands against a single international communications network will continue.
The extent to which the first amendment prevents that process in the United States is questionable. Our "right" to access will be decided by whatever five members of the Supreme Court decide we can access. We are seeing that now with TikTok.
Theater (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
revenge for the opium wars?
I heard that China plays the long game.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
HTML to the Rescue? Or are they banning the .com? (Score:2)
Seriously, why didn't they start moving people to the web? I watch tiktok in the browser every day.
Re: (Score:2)
At a big cost they might be able to maintain some continuity for users with European and Asian servers. Long term it's unsustainable, no income and massive expenses.
Even if Trump convinces congress to reverse course their business in the US will be massively disrupted regardless, they will have to start from scratch. If they lose at the supreme court, they are fucked.
Appstore (Score:2)
easy (Score:3, Informative)
(I've never understood why all apps haven't already been replaced with phone-optimized web sites...)
Because people routinely grant apps permission to do anything and everything on their phone, including hoovering up their contacts.
People with browsers, not so much.
Stop it at the router level? (Score:2)
I know, tiktok uses 80 and 443 and uses http protocols, but there's probably a way to distinguish tiktok traffic from all the other stuff.
Monetization (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
(I've never understood why all apps haven't already been replaced with phone-optimized web sites...) Data collection and monetization, aka selling to advertisers and other high bidders. Browsers have gotten much better and allowing users to control their data or just collect and monetize it themselves.
This is why I generally eschew apps wherever possible. Most of them don't need any local resources so are just a single use web browser with ads you cant block and slurps your personal data.
People rave that they're saving 20p on a burger but always complain when they figure out that Burger King has figured out that they've been searching for Picachu tail butt plugs. Usually the same people who complain that their phone is "listening to them"... it's not the phone dumbass, it's the idiot who installed an
Let people use what they want (Score:2)
How is tik tok bad but the unmoderated facebook is ok?
Yep, dictating a dumb law/rule might make you look (Score:2)
dumb(er).
Why is the order happening? What if it's not effective? What would you do next? Yeah, go do that...
This isn't rocket science, and talking about it won't change anything. Public officials need to understand what they're ordering, and to decide if it's worth the effort they're causing. Always fun when the person causing the problem is not the one who pays for their solution (guessing is a common tactic).
Nope (Score:2)
If it is not on the appstore, it won't be used. Especially the target demographic of TikTok is not able to install anything without the appstore.
Okay, Google may have it part in making installing apps from other sources unattractive, but one would think that most people still manage it, but the experience shows that if it's not on the appstore it will only be used by nerds. And most TikTok users are no nerds.
your last point (Score:1)
... Is the most interesting one, although I fear the answer is prosaic and cynical: because with "another fucking app" they can gather so much more information and thus make more money. Plus, afaik it's harder if not impossible to block ads in an app.
I too don't see the point of "apps" for reddit, x com, BBC, etc. The point of a web browser was to obviate the need for separate apps for common purpose, that is, reading text from various sources on line...