It's not leaks and breaches that are the immanent concern here. The concern is deep, adversarial manipulation of public sentiment -- a psyops asset that gives a competing nation significant leverage as they pursue ends that challenge established US interests in the Pacific.

You don't have to agree that protecting those interests is worth the disruption to the global market, free speech ideology, etc. But to engage in the debate, you need to recognize that this is the core concern.

>The concern is deep, adversarial manipulation of public sentiment -- a psyops asset that gives a competing nation significant leverage as they pursue ends that challenge established US interests in the Pacific.

I share the exact same concern about "deep, adversarial manipulation of public sentiment" from US-based corporations running algorithmically-generated designed to addict consumers, and also believe that everyone needs to recognize that core concern as well.

ALL of it needs to die.

> The concern is deep, adversarial manipulation of public sentiment

You mean letting U.S. citizens see the flour massacre video on a platform where the security state can’t ban it.

This bill languished for years until that happened.

Are we forgetting the psyop happens on every social media problem? Internet research agency in st petersburg says otherwise.

But it’s cool for Elon Musk to do it to get Trump elected, or zuck to do it for who knows what aims (but certainly expanding his own influence and power)