Buttons @ Buttons @programming.dev

Posts

7

Comments

359

Joined

2 yr. ago

It lists the foreign adversaries, they aren't just made up on a whim. Iran, N. Korea, China, Russia.

Where is WhatsApp based?

A neat programming project would be to migrate YouTube videos to PeerTube for content creators. If a YouTuber decides to put their videos on PeerTube as well, it should be as easy as possible.

Programmer pay is so bizarre, it makes me cynical about our entire economy.

If I'm a blue-collar worker maintaining the wires between banks, I get paid little. If I'm a programmer maintaining the banking software that controls everyone's money and is essential to the entire nation, I'm paid a little more, but not as much as some programmers.

If I'm a young man who creates a webpage that barely works venture capitalists are tripping over themselves trying to shove millions of dollars into my hands.

(Although, creating a webpage was the hot thing last decade, now the hot thing is creating an AI.)

You've made the most substantive comments in this post. Especially quoting the law and this information about Facebook.

For context, Facebook's revenue in 2019 was 70 billions dollars. So a 5 billion dollar fine isn't nothing. Everyone can judge these bans and fines for themselves and judge whether there's a double standard though.

You seem upset because I said TikTok stores their data in Oracle, but that's what they said in 2022. https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/17/tech/tiktok-user-data-oracle/index.html But, as you say, it appears in 2018 they were storing their data in China, and presumably that continued up until mid-2022.

I'm not a shill, but I am a cynic who believes the government is acting on behalf of their corporate friends (US media companies) rather than on general principles. I have no love for China. I wanted regulation that applied equally to all US companies. If you don't want to talk to me, fine, I'll discuss my opinion with others; even so, you've shared a lot of important and concrete information here, so thanks again.

They could even own a President. Unheard of! /s

I've also heard the data is physically stored and hosted by Oracle. So maybe China just copies it? The primary copy is in the US currently. Which doesn't really mean much.

I wouldn't be surprised if Meta's data ended up in China too. But Congress isn't targeting them.

I see. You're right about the text of the law. Thanks for taking the time to post that.

I would say it violates the 1st Amendment then. US Citizens have a right to say what they want, which includes saying what China wants if that is what the person wants.

The courts will have to decide.

They can't actually ban TikTok by name, it's unconstitutional to make laws targeted at individuals.

The current law actually says "no company can operate in the US with over 20% owned by China, Iran, N. Korea, or Russia", or something like that.

There's a lot of people in the US and at least of few of them would be willing to run TikTok the same way, same algorithms, same content, and sell the users data on shadowy data markets (which China can surely get their hands on), etc. I'm repeating myself now.

Again, my point is there are a lot of people in the US and surely some of them can form a company willing to do what China wants, and isn't that their right by our laws and morals of free speech? I know if things get heated enough laws and morals will be ignored (see Japanese internment camps).

And my even broader point is that this move against TikTok has ulterior motives. We should have created regulations that apply to all companies instead of targeting TikTok specifically. Even though we didn't technically target TikTok specifically, we effectively did.

If ByteDance is a normal company they will seek profits and sell for as much as they can.

But if TikTok is a Chinese psyop, they'll just use any of the many legal tricks we allow to change the "owner" while China still retains control. Companies do this all the time, look at shell companies and such. It's super easy for China to mask the true owner if they decide to.

This is why we should make broadly applicable regulations instead of picking on one specific company.

It wont work either, there's so many legal tricks that can change the owner of a company without actually changing who controls the company.

"TikTok was evil and controlled by China, so we banned it. Oh look, here's a totally new website called TokTik owned by a US Citizen named Mr. ILoveChina who built a TikTok replacement in 15 minutes by hiring foreign consultants for 2 cents an hour."

Why don't they just sell TikTok to a US Citizen who happens to believe TikTok should remain the same?

TikTok would remain exactly the same, with the exact same algorithms, but it would then be the free speech of a US Citizen so everyone would be happy. Maybe TikTok couldn't send the data directly to China anymore, but they could certainly sell personal data on the shadowy data markets, just like every other US owned tech company does, and if that data happens to find its way to China then 🤷 .

Shell companies hide the true owner of companies all the time. Why can't TikTok do the same?

The problem is they targeted TikTok specifically in the law and it will be easy to circumvent. "TikTok is banned, but check out this totally new website called TokTik with the exact same content but owned by a US Citizen".

This is why they should have created regulations that apply to all companies. Because making regulations that depend on who owns the company will only cause TikTok to change the technicality of who owns the company. They can do so through all kinds of legal tricks without ever actually giving up control.

All the public will have to do is type "tiktok.com" in their browser and their computer will connect to directly to servers in China. For now, they don't even need a VPN.

Then our politicians will start discussing a national firewall. We'll show that we're better than China by doing the same things China would do (/s).

I've been wondering the same.

What prevents a few US Citizens from forming a totally new and independent company called BitDance and then ByteDance sells them TikTok for $3.99, and then BitDance hires a company from China to help consult on the algorithms they use.

Okay, but I'm more interested in intra-legal reasons this couldn't be done.

I'm sure they could find 2, 3, or 3000 US Citizens who are willing to sell out to China, and then TikTok would be owned by US Citizens, but would still be doing what China wants.

If TikTok's purpose is to spread Chinese propaganda, can't they just find a US Citizen that can run the website for them?

"Yeah, it's my personal website where I exercise my 1st Amendment rights, also it has 100 million daily users and I happen to agree with China on a lot of things." If a US Citizen were to say this, there would be nothing illegal about it I think?

I've always wondered what would happen if ByteDance sells TikTok for $5 to a US Citizen who frequently visits China for lavish vacations, and that US Citizen decide to keep all the algorithms the same.

If China has an ulterior motive with TIkTok, can't they just find a US Citizen to carry out their ulterior motive?

Video games were such a wild west back in the 80s and 90s that it's often not clear who even owns the copyright anymore.

Earlier you said:

i’m permanently anti democrat party

and I read that as "I will never vote democrat". I see now that's not what you said.

I too would love to see us do better than the two deeply flawed parties we have now. I wish we had a better voting system that allowed better parties.

Bipartisan support is only rare when it comes to things like giving healthcare to the poor.

I get you, but asking people to participate in democracy is not "weaponization", and I'm 100% okay with popular figures, even from other countries, telling people how to vote, because who doesn't tell people how to vote these days?