Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Social Networks China

TikTok Goes Offline in US - Then Comes Back Online After Trump Promises 90-Day Reprieve (apnews.com) 87

Posted by EditorDavid from the network-effects dept.
CNN reports: TikTok appears to be coming back online just hours after President-elect Donald Trump pledged Sunday that he would sign an executive order Monday that aims to restore the banned app. Around 12 hours after first shutting itself down, U.S. users began to have access to TikTok on a web browser and in the app, although the page still showed a warning about the shutdown.
The brief outage was "the first time in history the U.S. government has outlawed a widely popular social media network," reports NPR. Apple and Google removed TikTok from their app stores. (And Apple also removed Lemon8).

The incoming president announced his pending executive order "in a post on his Truth Social account," reports the Associated Press, "as millions of TikTok users in the U.S. awoke to discover they could no longer access the TikTok app or platform."

But two Republican Senators said Sunday that the incoming president doesn't have the power to pause the TikTok ban. Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Peter Ricketts of Nebraska posted on X.com that "Now that the law has taken effect, there's no legal basis for any kind of 'extension' of its effective date. For TikTok to come back online in the future, ByteDance must agree to a sale... severing all ties between TikTok and Communist China. Only then will Americans be protected from the grave threat posted to their privacy and security by a communist-controlled TikTok."

The Associated Press reports that the incoming president offered this rationale for the reprieve in his Truth Social post. "Americans deserve to see our exciting Inauguration on Monday, as well as other events and conversations." The law gives the sitting president authority to grant a 90-day extension if a viable sale is underway. Although investors made a few offers, ByteDance previously said it would not sell. In his post on Sunday, Trump said he "would like the United States to have a 50% ownership position in a joint venture," but it was not immediately clear if he was referring to the government or an American company...

"A law banning TikTok has been enacted in the U.S.," a pop-up message informed users who opened the TikTok app and tried to scroll through videos on Saturday night. "Unfortunately that means you can't use TikTok for now." The service interruption TikTok instituted hours earlier caught most users by surprise. Experts had said the law as written did not require TikTok to take down its platform, only for app stores to remove it. Current users had been expected to continue to have access to videos until the app stopped working due to a lack of updates... "We are fortunate that President Trump has indicated that he will work with us on a solution to reinstate TikTok once he takes office. Please stay tuned," read the pop-up message...

Apple said the apps would remain on the devices of people who already had them installed, but in-app purchases and new subscriptions no longer were possible and that operating updates to iPhones and iPads might affect the apps' performance.

In the nine months since Congress passed the sale-or-ban law, no clear buyers emerged, and ByteDance publicly insisted it would not sell TikTok. But Trump said he hoped his administration could facilitate a deal to "save" the app. TikTok CEO Shou Chew is expected to attend Trump's inauguration with a prime seating location. Chew posted a video late Saturday thanking Trump for his commitment to work with the company to keep the app available in the U.S. and taking a "strong stand for the First Amendment and against arbitrary censorship...."

On Saturday, artificial intelligence startup Perplexity AI submitted a proposal to ByteDance to create a new entity that merges Perplexity with TikTok's U.S. business, according to a person familiar with the matter...
The article adds that TikTok "does not operate in China, where ByteDance instead offers Douyin, the Chinese sibling of TikTok that follows Beijing's strict censorship rules."

Sunday morning Republican House speaker Mike Johnson offered his understanding of Trump's planned executive order, according to Politico. Speaking on Meet the Press, Johnson said "the way we read that is that he's going to try to force along a true divestiture, changing of hands, the ownership.

"It's not the platform that members of Congress are concerned about. It's the Chinese Communist Party and their manipulation of the algorithms."

Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader ArchieBunker for sharing the news.

TikTok Goes Offline in US - Then Comes Back Online After Trump Promises 90-Day Reprieve More | Reply

TikTok Goes Offline in US - Then Comes Back Online After Trump Promises 90-Day Reprieve

Comments Filter:

  • I love Trump's intellectual consistency. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheMiddleRoad ( 1153113 ) on Sunday January 19, 2025 @01:26PM (#65101233)

    First he tries to destroy TikTok because China uses it to brainwash kids. Then he realizes that he can use it for brainwashing too, so he now wants to keep it. Just think of all the billions he can make off crypto! Fucker isn't even president yet and he's selling us out. The next 4+ years is going to be great.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Ceasefire in Canaan, TikTok online - what cannot this man do?

      Y'all realize it's all a big distraction from his war with the Danes?

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Powercntrl ( 458442 )

      First he tries to destroy TikTok because China uses it to brainwash kids.

      I'd love to put the blame on Trump, really I would. But the fucking Democrats couldn't read the room (or apparently, the 1A) and realize that banning TikTok would be hugely unpopular, so they went right along with it. The TikTok ban should've been flushed down the toilet with the rest of the bad ideas from the first Trump administration, but now the Biden administration gets to own it.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by DeanonymizedCoward ( 7230266 )

        I'd love to put the blame on Trump, really I would. But the fucking Democrats couldn't read the room (or apparently, the 1A) and realize that banning TikTok would be hugely unpopular, so they went right along with it. The TikTok ban should've been flushed down the toilet with the rest of the bad ideas from the first Trump administration, but now the Biden administration gets to own it.

        This. 100%. The Biden admin, and the Dems in Congress, and Harris when she was running, could have all stood on the 1A, and said "we don't agree with some of the stuff that's said on here, but we will defend to the death your right as a free American to read it."

        They could have addressed the data-gathering concerns by pushing strong privacy laws that would apply to everyone doing business in the USA, because I'm not sure Facebook or Xitter or Allstate gathering your data is any better than China doing it.

        • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

          by ClickOnThis ( 137803 )

          If you and Powercntrl think that the TikTok ban violates the First Amendment, then why did SCOTUS uphold the law banning it? [npr.org]

          And BTW, SCOTUS upheld it unanimously. [cnbc.com]

          • Re:I love Trump's intellectual consistency. (Score:4, Insightful)

            by Powercntrl ( 458442 ) on Sunday January 19, 2025 @05:02PM (#65101637) Homepage

            If you and Powercntrl think that the TikTok ban violates the First Amendment, then why did SCOTUS uphold the law banning it? [npr.org]

            Do I really need to define the expression "kangaroo court"?

            The justices didn't even take the time necessary to fully consider the broader implications of the ban. Compare how quickly TikTok's fate was decided against the Texas porn age-verification law case [cnn.com], which likely won't be resolved until summer. TikTok was given a trial that would've made Cardassians proud. [fandom.com]

            This is the part where I'd like to remind the reader that Star Trek's Cardassians were depicted as authoritarian as a not-so-thinly-veiled metaphor for real-world authoritarian regimes. They were a fictional representation of the very real dangers of oppressive governments, the consequences of militarism, and the moral costs of sacrificing individual freedoms for state security. Any of that starting to sound familiar?

            • "Do I really need to define the expression "kangaroo court"?"

              Whatever your feelings about the court, the Constitution is very clear on who gets to decide how the Constitution applies. If the Supremes say it's not a first amendment violation, then ipso facto it is not a first amendment violation.

              • This wasn't a case that should've been decided in such a cavalier manner. Aside from the immediate and obvious free speech ramifications of deplatforming approximately 170 million Americans (that's a whole lot bigger than the usual town square analogy), it also established precedent that it's fine for the government to do this again to the next platform and/or app that draws their ire.

                I'm not going to sit here and argue that the court lacks authority or that their decision isn't now the law of the land. T

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by djinn6 ( 1868030 )

          They want to influence the public discourse, that's all. You will see content they want you to see and nothing else. That way you will happily oblige whenever they want to push some agenda. A foreign-owned entity has little incentive to go along with this.

        • we don't agree with some of the stuff that's said on here, but we will defend to the death your right as a free American to read it.

          Democrats turned their backs on that a long time ago. Even the ACLU no longer believes that.

          https://nymag.com/intelligence... [nymag.com]

      • The 1A has nothing to do with it. Foreign companies have quite literally ZERO guarantees to do business in the US. Honestly the entire discussion should center around the Commerce Clause, which gives clear power to the US Federal government to control and regulate trade internationally. As such, any foreign business has to comply with whatever rules put forth. I would note, Tiktok wasn't banned per se. It was required to reincorporate with all materials present in a US own company, and they refused. The pur

    • First he tries to destroy TikTok because China uses it to brainwash kids. Then he realizes that he can use it for brainwashing too, so he now wants to keep it. ...

      It's worse than that, his reasoning is all about *him*:

      the incoming president offered this rationale for the reprieve in his Truth Social post. "Americans deserve to see our exciting Inauguration on Monday, as well as other events and conversations."

      As though people can't see the inauguration events w/o TikTok. (*eye-roll*)

      Trump wanted to ban TikTok in his first term, then waffled on it noting the youngsters using it, then met with mega donor Jeff Yass (net worth ~$50 billion) who has a combined 22% stake in ByteDance, and is now solidly for keeping TikTok around. From Trump’s cozy relationship with billionaire mega donor Jeff Yass could be key in helping TikTok avoid a U.S. ban [fortune.com]:

      Much of the Pennsylvania-based billionaire’s wealth is tied up in no other than TikTok, as Forbes reports that Susquehanna’s most valuable holding is ByteDance, TikTok’s parent company. Susquehanna holds a 15% stake in ByteDance, a source “familiar with the investment,” told the New York Times. And Yass himself owns 7%.

      • It's worse than that, his reasoning is all about *him*:

        That's par for the course; Trump only hates wind turbines because he thought they spoiled the view when he was in Scotland.

        • It's worse than that, his reasoning is all about *him*:

          That's par for the course; Trump only hates wind turbines because he thought they spoiled the view when he was in Scotland.

          Hold the phone. Are you saying wind turbines don't actually cause noise cancer? /s ;-)

    • First he tries to destroy TikTok because China uses it to brainwash kids. Then he realizes that he can use it for brainwashing too, so he now wants to keep it. Just think of all the billions he can make off crypto! Fucker isn't even president yet and he's selling us out. The next 4+ years is going to be great.

      Donald Trump has launched a new meme coin, according to posts from his X [x.com] and Truth Social [truthsocial.com] accounts this weekend. The posts, which have come just days before Trump’s inauguration, were initially met with suspicion by many that his accounts had been hacked.

      Skeptics highlighted by Decrypt [decrypt.co] last night pointed to several red flags, such as that the millions of dollars seeding the project came from Binance and Gate, which only serve overseas customers. The coin’s website credits the project to the sam

  • The whole thing is silly... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MpVpRb ( 1423381 ) on Sunday January 19, 2025 @01:33PM (#65101243)

    ...and ineffective
    ALL online services collect data and sell it on the open market
    This is just political theater

    • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

      by ClickOnThis ( 137803 )

      The issue with TikTok is national security, not marketing of data.

      And BTW, the TikTok ban had bipartisan support, including Trump's ... until he changed his mind.

      • Sure because China knowing what stupid tidepod challenge you do is national security. And if you're worried about them controlling a narrative they already do that on American platforms.

        You've been watching too much fox news.

    • I think that Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg wanted TikTok taken out, Zuckerberg in particular, because of the way it competes with their services. While it's not a direct competition it does pull people away from Instagram and even Twitter to some extent.

      I suspect China has offered to let Trump or one of Trump's children expand businesses into their markets and/or have preferential treatment for their factories.

      Anyone remember when it was a scandal that Jimmy Carter had a peanut farm?

      • I suspect China has offered to let Trump or one of Trump's children expand businesses into their markets and/or have preferential treatment for their factories.

        Didn't you see the Trump-ass-kissing message TikTok put up yesterday when it went offline? I'm sure the deal involved something along the lines of "We'll let you stick around if you bias the algorithm in favor of right-wing content. Surely, being Chinese you know how spreading the message of the one true party works."

        And just like that, TikTok is back, and America takes one step closer to becoming Russia with a slightly warmer climate.

        • just getting rid of tiktok was enough since Facebook & Twitter are both heavily right wing now (with FB eliminating the fact checkers, reality has a well known liberal bias after all...)

          I think it's just a large bribe. There's gonna be lots and lots of those over the next 4 years.

  • Oligarch Cronyism starts with TikTok (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hirschma ( 187820 ) on Sunday January 19, 2025 @01:37PM (#65101247)

    It'll be sold to one of Trump's supporters or new knee-benders - Musk, Bezos, Zuck, etc., at a fire-sale price. Reversing the ban simply keeps the value of the asset high.

    This is a new spin on what happened after the Soviets fell - valuable assets sold for a pittance to political chums. This time, instead of the assets being state-owned, they're private, but dependent on the state to be allowed to exist.

    • Say it ain't so! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Okian Warrior ( 537106 ) on Sunday January 19, 2025 @01:41PM (#65101253) Homepage Journal

      It'll be sold to one of Trump's supporters or new knee-benders - Musk, Bezos, Zuck, etc., at a fire-sale price. Reversing the ban simply keeps the value of the asset high.

      This is a new spin on what happened after the Soviets fell - valuable assets sold for a pittance to political chums. This time, instead of the assets being state-owned, they're private, but dependent on the state to be allowed to exist.

      You mean the Trump administration will be just like post-soviet Russia?

      Say it ain't so!

    • It'll be sold to one of Trump's supporters or new knee-benders - Musk, Bezos, Zuck, etc., at a fire-sale price. Reversing the ban simply keeps the value of the asset high.

      This is a new spin on what happened after the Soviets fell - valuable assets sold for a pittance to political chums. This time, instead of the assets being state-owned, they're private, but dependent on the state to be allowed to exist.

      It is not that different from nationalization (a la Castro's Cuba), except with private interests taking over under government force rather than the government itself.

  • I thought they wanted it gone? (Score:3)

    by akw0088 ( 7073305 ) on Sunday January 19, 2025 @01:42PM (#65101261)
    Seems like a lot of negotiations for something they supposedly want to ban. Seems almost like a money grab
  • So much for an entire generation having to go outside for a day or pick up one of those book things they've heard tale of.

    Thankfully /. is so unimportant that no one will think of shutting it down and I don't have to worry about doing either of those things.

    • Have you seen what outside is like, recently? Fire on one hand and ice on the other. I don't blame them for not going outside.

    • So much for an entire generation having to go outside for a day or pick up one of those book things they've heard tale of.

      Look at every country that bans access to certain forms of information exchange out of fears that it will corrupt its citizens. Can you truly say such bans have had an overall positive effect on their societies?

      • Apparently everyone had lost their sense of humor over this. I was considering adding a bit to the end of my post about having my mom bring some pizza rolls down to the basem^H^H^H^H^H command center for me later today but decided that would have been a bit much.

        For the record I think banning any of these is pointless because I consider all of them about equally bad and it would be a bit like banning Camel cigarettes while allowing every other manufacturer to continue doing business. I wouldn't even ban

        • Apparently everyone had lost their sense of humor over this.

          It's hard to tell these days because some folks genuinely do believe that restricting access to information could make for a more harmonious community.

  • the law only required (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hdyoung ( 5182939 ) on Sunday January 19, 2025 @01:49PM (#65101273)
    the app stores to remove the availability of the app itself. Any tiktok app on a person's phone is still there. The law states nothing about the service itself. The decision to pull tiktok offline was made by the Chinese. If the service is coming back online, it's because China decided to turn it back on.

    Trump had nothing to do with the law. Trump has no power over the law. No "executive action" is gonna change the law. Anything Trump says about the law is pure blather.

    It's all for show. It's all hot air and professional-wrestling-style posing. I'm gonna guess that the Chinese turned the app off to make a point, and then back on, mostly because it makes them money. Also, the inauguration is right around the corner, and Trump wants to be able to tell his peeps that "I saved tiktok". The Chinese are doing him a favor. Actually, the entire world is currently trying to get on his good side. Whatever. That guy doesn't even know what the word "gratitude" means. And the Chinese know it. They know that a cheap cookie like this won't put them in his good books, but they lose money every second the app is nonfunctioning.

    The law was passed and upheld by the supreme court. Unless that changes, no US-based internet company will be able to offer the app or any app updates, and Trump has almost zero power over the situation.

    I wonder what would happen if China mirrored the entire ecosystem onto an app called "MikMok" and relaunched. Would it get around the law? How many months could they operate before getting shut down again?

    • Re:the law only required (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mmdurrant ( 638055 ) on Sunday January 19, 2025 @02:27PM (#65101367)
      Countries like China understand that having a weak man like Trump in the White House benefits them.

    • Just make it an official act. The court gave him the thumbs up. https://www.supremecourt.gov/o... [supremecourt.gov]

    • "I wonder what would happen if China mirrored the entire ecosystem onto an app called "MikMok" and relaunched. "

      ByteDance already has at least two other apps in this space that people are moving to.

    • The entire world has realise that opposing Trump is just giving him what he wants: a fight. It's what he does best and does nothing but create noise behind which decisions continue to made. So now they realise that if they are nice to him and pander to his ego then they will be a chance of getting what they want. The real concern is then which celebrity billionaire / tech mogul he is the most enamoured by. That person will then get top billing when it comes to driving the actions of the POTUS. Right now the

  • Interesting (Score:3)

    by Pop69 ( 700500 ) <billy@benarty[ ].uk ['.co' in gap]> on Sunday January 19, 2025 @02:06PM (#65101307) Homepage
    What other laws can he announce will be ignored via executive order ?

    • Re:Interesting (Score:4, Interesting)

      by hdyoung ( 5182939 ) on Sunday January 19, 2025 @02:28PM (#65101371)
      If the rest of the ecosystem agrees, he can ignore a lot. We ignored some very explicit anti-marijuana laws for a really long time, because pretty much the entire country recognized they were stupid but nobody had the motivation to repeal them. We kind of just stopped enforcing them.

      But that only works if 99% of everyone is on board. That won’t happen with Trump. Huge chunks of the country are gonna fight his agenda tooth-and-nail. He’ll try to ignore laws, for sure, but every time he does it’ll immediately get litigated up to the supreme court. That crowd is conservative, but they’ve made it very clear that they’re not Trump-lickers.

      Our laws will hold.

    • Re:Interesting (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Powercntrl ( 458442 ) on Sunday January 19, 2025 @02:40PM (#65101397) Homepage

      What other laws can he announce will be ignored via executive order ?

      We've got four years to find out! I'm sure this is just the beginning. America got what it voted for. This isn't 2016 where we can blame the ensuing clown show on the electoral college, Trump was truly the peoples' choice this time around.

  • I was surprised to see this in TFS:

    The Associated Press reports that the incoming president offered this rationale for the reprieve in his Truth Social post. "Americans deserve to see our exciting Inauguration on Monday, as well as other events and conversations."

    And they can't if TikTok is banned?? That seems like a feeble and self-serving excuse to un-ban the platform.

  • Assholes like Cotton are always happy to cite the Constitution when it suits their position. The party of Business is a bunch of greedy unprincipled liars.
  • So, a "promise" is good enough these days? I mean, I can see if Tik-Tok came back on line tomorrow, after he actually signs the Executive order. I don't understand what rules and laws mean anymore. I just don't. And while I don't really care if Tik-Tok is "banned" or not, the fact is it was, following due course by our elected officials, and now it's not, magically, based on a "promise". SMH

    • Not hard to understand at all, there is a time limit in which a president can change things temporarily. We're within that time limit.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

      TikTok turned itself off and it turned itself back on in response to the US head of state saying it would be okay. No laws involved in either the off or on bit. The people the actual law applies to, the app stores, removed it and didn't put it back.

      Statements by a head of state actually do mean something. Worth keeping in mind.

      • The people the actual law applies to, the app stores, removed it and didn't put it back.

        Which really is only an issue for IOS. You'd assume this would make people wake up and realize that Apple has too much control, but they're just surprised Pikachu faced about it. [reddit.com]

        For Android, TikTok's APK is available here. [uptodown.com]

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by ceoyoyo ( 59147 )

          Google also removed TikTok from their app store. Sure, if you really want it you can install it wiithout using their app store. You can also sideload apps on iOS.

          TikTok is just a web site, just like Facebook and most of the other social media "apps" so you can always just go to tiktok.com using a regular old web browser.

          • You can also sideload apps on iOS.

            There's workarounds, but they're far more inconvenient (you have to deal with expiring signatures and other various annoyances) than just going into the phone's settings and enabling apps from unknown sources, which is how it works on Android. Didn't you see that Reddit thread I linked to of iPhone users having a conniption fit because they can't reinstall TikTok?

  • Could be a good compromise: we allows TikTok, China allows Facebook, Instagram and X/Twitter.

    • Actually, better yet would be the shutdown Meta and X in the US. They are worse than TikTok. They are certainly as much of a national security risk as TikTok. And if Meta could have come up with a better system, they would have by now. Instead, Meta started a campaign about all sensitive data TikTok is collecting. Well, how does Meta know this? Because they are already doing exactly the same thing,

      I expect TikTok won't be sold to any group of US investors unless it is completely stripped of it's "uniquely e

  • Outage, not outrage.

  • So, how much money do you think the TikTok President/China offered to pay into the President's personal account? Trump doesn't do anything if he's not benefitting personally.

  • Anything that cuts down on the abomination of vertical video is a win in my book. If God had wanted vertical video, our eyes would be aligned vertically, not horizontally.

    (I haven't studied carefully the legal issues, but I strongly suspect this is protectionism packaged as national security.)

Slashdot Top Deals

"I have not the slightest confidence in 'spiritual manifestations.'" -- Robert G. Ingersoll

Close