| ▲ | medhir 13 hours ago |
| In a more functional democracy we would see that mass data collection of any sort, by any company (foreign or domestic), is a national security risk. Have witnessed first-hand the threats by foreign state actors penetrating US-based cloud infrastructure. And it’s not like any of our domestic corporations are practicing the type of security hygiene necessary to prevent those intrusions. So idk, the whole thing feels like a farce that will mainly benefit Zuck and co while doing very little to ultimately protect our interests. We would be much better off actually addressing data privacy and passing legislation that regulates every company in a consistent manner. |
|
| ▲ | rayiner 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| > In a more functional democracy we would see that mass data collection of any sort, by any company (foreign or domestic), is a national security risk. You obviously don't mean "democracy," but some other word. We don't see mass data collection as a problem because most Americans don't care about privacy. The only reason this Tik Tok thing is even registering is because of the treat of China, which Americans do care about. |
| |
| ▲ | 34679 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | There's nothing preventing China from buying mass data from Facebook or one of the many data brokers. This is about censorship and the ability to control public narratives. | | |
| ▲ | bl4kers 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You're falsely equating mass data. If anyone can buy the data from brokers then it's effectively public and could be weaponized by anyone. If TikTok collects their own data and doesn't sell it, then it's not public and can be weaponized exclusively by the Chinese government. And that's separate even from algorithm manipulation, which is another liability that's difficult to catch & prove definitively. | |
| ▲ | mgraczyk 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yes there is. Facebook has never done anything like this and never would, that's what is preventing it. | | |
| ▲ | 34679 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | Facebook has never sold user data? LOL https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-46618582 | | |
| ▲ | mgraczyk 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Do you think your link shows that Facebook sold user data? Did you notice that Facebook wasn't paid and that the users specifically consented? | |
| ▲ | senordevnyc 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | "We have to seriously challenge the claim by Facebook that they are not selling user data," commented Damian Collins MP, chair of the UK Parliament's Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee.
"They may not be letting people take it away by the bucket load, but they do reward companies with access to data that others are denied, if they place a high value on the business they do together. This is just another form of selling." Not defending what FB did in your example, but when you have to start redefining terms in order to make your argument, you're on shaky ground. | | |
| ▲ | 34679 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | My point is that as long as data is being collected and sold in the US, China has access to it. They don't need TikTok for that. The US government, on the other hand, desires to control all narratives widely disseminated among its citizens. They can do that with Facebook. They can do that with Twitter. They cannot do that with a foreign company. So they shut it down. | | |
| ▲ | senordevnyc 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | And my point is that it wasn’t being sold, it was made available to strategic partners, who don’t seem to have even accessed much of it. It’s a totally different situation than what you’re talking about. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | 0xbadcafebee 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's questionable what a more functional democracy would actually do, since there hasn't really been one in history. There's been other forms of democracy, but they've all had their flaws, and none of them so far have acted in the interests of all the people in that country. |
| |
| ▲ | sobellian 11 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I am not an "America bad" type of fellow, but US democracy is clearly reaching a local minimum. I suspect "never more functional" is an idea with which even your representative would disagree. There are multiple major issues that Congress should have addressed decades ago and instead they've only become more intractable. The country is more than its government, but the core democratic component, Congress, simply gets very little done. I do not think it can go much longer before some series of events forces broad compromises and realignment. | | | |
| ▲ | medhir 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I mean, however flawed the EU may be, I think they are earnestly trying to protect the average person from the current paradigm of abusive data collection. Perfect can’t be the enemy of good. | | |
| ▲ | rdm_blackhole 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | That is blatantly wrong. The EU has been trying to ban encryption for the last 3 years so that it can read all your text messages, listen to your conversations and monitor the images you send to your loved ones/friends without requiring a warrant from the authorities, therefore granting them an unlimited access to everyone's private life without offering any possible recourse. The EU's pro-privacy stance is a just a facade, they want as much data as the US government, they just don't want to admit it publicly. | | |
| ▲ | medhir 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | ok, that’s fair, I totally blanked on the anti-encryption stance. I still think having something on the books for general data protection is a net good, as it forced all the biggest US-based companies to at least start implementing data privacy controls. |
| |
| ▲ | rayiner 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [flagged] | |
| ▲ | Always42 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Isn’t the EU trying to ban encryption? Do you really think they give a crap about average person | | |
|
|
|
| ▲ | DoneWithAllThat 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Claiming that “mass data collection” by our own government is inherently a natural security risk is not an assertion based on rational evidence. |
| |
| ▲ | cush 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's absolutely a risk because these databases are unregulated honey pots. They're a total liability |
|
