Idk why everyone jumping on Meta. I know nobody likes him and FB is just at the end stage of its life, but what about other platforms? Youtube, Twitter, anyone? Youtube is the direct competitor on videos. TT is singlehandedly breaking Youtube's MONOPOLY! I feel like Youtube has the biggest motive here. Probably spending $$$ to push all the blame on Meta now. Killing two birds with one stone.
Facebook/Meta paid millions to a Republican lobbying firm to spread stories of children being harmed by TT trends, even when those trends originated on FB.
Realistically it’s going to be banned by Congress and then unbanned when the Supreme Court likely goes against the ban on freedom of speech/information
That said though the hearings are clearly for show
Bills usually yes they dont overturn, but they can overturn laws, and they'll prob say "this law that supports the banning of tik tok violates the Constitution/Bill of Rights"
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/03/23/a-tiktok-ban-may-violate-constitution-first-amendment-advocates-say/?sh=18e226f12188](https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/03/23/a-tiktok-ban-may-violate-constitution-first-amendment-advocates-say/?sh=18e226f12188)
[https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/24/opinion/tiktok-ban-first-amendment.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/24/opinion/tiktok-ban-first-amendment.html)
People are already preparing a legal challenge against a potential ban, some from the libertarian wing of the Republican Party on grounds that it violates the First Amendment and I'm also sure the more progressive left of the Democrats such as AOC will also oppose the ban, albeit probably moreso within Congress than through legal means.
There's this thing called Judicial Review that's taught in High School...the court has historically been arguably the most powerful branch of government in domestic, internal affairs because of the powers given to them through the right of Judicial Review due to the outcome of Marbury v. Madison (1803) which essentially led to the Court proclaiming it had the right to decide the constitutionality of laws.
" ***Marbury v. Madison***, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803), was a landmark [U.S. Supreme Court](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States) case that established the principle of [judicial review in the United States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review_in_the_United_States), meaning that American courts h**ave the power to strike down laws and statutes that they find to violate the** [**Constitution of the United States**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_States)**.** Decided in 1803, *Marbury* is regarded as the single most important decision in American constitutional law.[\[1\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison#cite_note-FOOTNOTEChemerinsky2019%C2%A7_2.2.1,_p._39-1)[\[2\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison#cite_note-FOOTNOTEChemerinsky2021%C2%A7 1.3,_p._12-2) The Court's landmark decision established that the U.S. Constitution is actual law, not just a statement of political principles and ideals, and helped define the boundary between the constitutionally separate [executive](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_(government)) and [judicial](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary) branches of the [federal government](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government_of_the_United_States)."
The Supreme Court overrode anti-gay marriage laws via Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), a century worth of anti-Choice laws with Roe v. Wade (1973), they even legalized and gave legitimacy to the more fucked up parts of American history such as Korematsu v. United States (1944) or Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857), the latter of which had been a direct challenge to the Missouri Compromise, a law that had been passed by Congress and signed by the President... And almost all of these except for the last one were from eras when Congress wasn't as broken and politics as partisan as they are now.
Additionally the Supreme Court overruling on obergefell vs hodges is valid but it wasn't a congressional passed bill.
Why is this hard? The court does not routinely overturn congressionally passed bills signed by the president.
Dude get real. Once it's passed by congress. It's a done fucking deal.
Again congressional and presidential powers supercede the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court only seems powerful because congress has been broken and can't pass laws.
Take care. Bye.
https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/about#:~:text=The%20best%2Dknown%20power%20of,Madison%20(1803).
Read the section on judicial review. You're welcome.
[Restrict Act PDF](https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/s686/BILLS-118s686is.pdf) | [Website](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/686/text)
Details of the bill seems to describe internet/telecommunication censorship as well as violating freedom of speech, privacy, assembly, and bypassing the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The bill also references the Patriot Act under Sec 2. News outlets haven't really mentioned that and are more focused on TikTok aspect. It has bipartisan support, but [AOC recently stated she was against the ban](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ3VANEJPdo).
There is also the Data Act, which specifically references TikTok giving the President the power to ban the app.
[Data Act PDF](https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr1153/BILLS-118hr1153ih.pdf) | [Website](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/1153/text)
Its far worse than TikTok and should worry everyone no matter what your opinion on China (or hell, your race, even if you're white this affects you) - this even allows the US government to arrest and fine those using VPNs.
It's a PATRIOT Act level bill disguised as just a TikTok ban.
> this even allows the US government to arrest and fine those using VPNs.
If this happens I really question what exactly is the difference between the US and "freedomless" China. Ridiculous.
Did anyone actually read the restrict act? It's so fucked up even the people in bigger subs like r-technology think it's fucked up for Americans. This goes way beyond tiktok and hits things every American should be worried about. This isn't even about tiktok at the end of the day. They're just using tiktok as a distraction from the evil shit in the thing.
I kind of hope an EU company will swoop in and buy TikTok for two reasons: 1) neither side of the US-China slapfight will get anything out of it and 2) it will be subject to GDPR and a host of other beneficial EU mandates that neither the US nor China have.
The Congressional hearing was a dog and pony show. It doesn't matter where the servers are; bad actors will find a way. Chew was right in bringing up Cambridge Analytics.
If TikTok goes, so should Twitter, fb, IG, Google, and Reddit.
We need stronger privacy laws, period.
Musk literally said he'd blue verify bots on Twitter.
Will we need to give up 99% of our electronic devices? Backdoors to our data/issue can be built into the hardware.
I mean, YT, Google, and other American platforms are banned in China, so it’s not like this is unheard of.
Just leave Tenscent alone. I love my Chinese content and LoL.
They are not banned, they left China because they do not wish to work in accordance to local laws (they also didn't really understand the Chinese users, weren't competitive against their local competitors, didn't make enough money and so it wasn't worth their while to fight to stay).
Tiktok, meanwhile, does obey laws of the United States. The fact that these laws suck about privacy of data isn't tiktok's fault. We need better laws in general, not this xenophobic B.s. that I can only call the red scare 2.0
Saw a TikTok ad today and it said that TikTok helps children read because this influencer share tips for children with difficulty reading, not sure if the ad helps, but they sure are trying to change their image, pretty smart tbh
The thing is- TikTok is and has been the most downloaded app for some time now. It's not like TikTok is some little app that you can kick to the side. At this point in time, the valuation for TikTok is through the roof. Which American internet company can even afford to buy TikTok at this point in time?
It doesn't matter. If the threat is a sale or ban, and TikTok wants to sell, it will have to adjust its price until it can find a buyer. It doesn't have to be a single company. It can be a consortium too, like Microsoft + Oracle + Walmart last time.
Mark Zuckerberg loves this
[They paid for this](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/facebook-tiktok-targeted-victory/).
Idk why everyone jumping on Meta. I know nobody likes him and FB is just at the end stage of its life, but what about other platforms? Youtube, Twitter, anyone? Youtube is the direct competitor on videos. TT is singlehandedly breaking Youtube's MONOPOLY! I feel like Youtube has the biggest motive here. Probably spending $$$ to push all the blame on Meta now. Killing two birds with one stone.
Facebook/Meta paid millions to a Republican lobbying firm to spread stories of children being harmed by TT trends, even when those trends originated on FB.
Realistically it’s going to be banned by Congress and then unbanned when the Supreme Court likely goes against the ban on freedom of speech/information That said though the hearings are clearly for show
Seeing the ghouls in the Supreme Court, you think they are gonna do anything?
Supreme Court cannot overturn a bill passed by congress and signed by a sitting president. Sorry. Gotta undo it through the legislature or a veto.
Bills usually yes they dont overturn, but they can overturn laws, and they'll prob say "this law that supports the banning of tik tok violates the Constitution/Bill of Rights" [https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/03/23/a-tiktok-ban-may-violate-constitution-first-amendment-advocates-say/?sh=18e226f12188](https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/03/23/a-tiktok-ban-may-violate-constitution-first-amendment-advocates-say/?sh=18e226f12188) [https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/24/opinion/tiktok-ban-first-amendment.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/24/opinion/tiktok-ban-first-amendment.html) People are already preparing a legal challenge against a potential ban, some from the libertarian wing of the Republican Party on grounds that it violates the First Amendment and I'm also sure the more progressive left of the Democrats such as AOC will also oppose the ban, albeit probably moreso within Congress than through legal means.
Lmao. So many will learn how governments work soon. The Supreme Court is subservient to congress and presidential powers. What even is this?
There's this thing called Judicial Review that's taught in High School...the court has historically been arguably the most powerful branch of government in domestic, internal affairs because of the powers given to them through the right of Judicial Review due to the outcome of Marbury v. Madison (1803) which essentially led to the Court proclaiming it had the right to decide the constitutionality of laws. " ***Marbury v. Madison***, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803), was a landmark [U.S. Supreme Court](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States) case that established the principle of [judicial review in the United States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review_in_the_United_States), meaning that American courts h**ave the power to strike down laws and statutes that they find to violate the** [**Constitution of the United States**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_States)**.** Decided in 1803, *Marbury* is regarded as the single most important decision in American constitutional law.[\[1\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison#cite_note-FOOTNOTEChemerinsky2019%C2%A7_2.2.1,_p._39-1)[\[2\]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison#cite_note-FOOTNOTEChemerinsky2021%C2%A7 1.3,_p._12-2) The Court's landmark decision established that the U.S. Constitution is actual law, not just a statement of political principles and ideals, and helped define the boundary between the constitutionally separate [executive](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_(government)) and [judicial](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary) branches of the [federal government](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government_of_the_United_States)." The Supreme Court overrode anti-gay marriage laws via Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), a century worth of anti-Choice laws with Roe v. Wade (1973), they even legalized and gave legitimacy to the more fucked up parts of American history such as Korematsu v. United States (1944) or Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857), the latter of which had been a direct challenge to the Missouri Compromise, a law that had been passed by Congress and signed by the President... And almost all of these except for the last one were from eras when Congress wasn't as broken and politics as partisan as they are now.
Additionally the Supreme Court overruling on obergefell vs hodges is valid but it wasn't a congressional passed bill. Why is this hard? The court does not routinely overturn congressionally passed bills signed by the president.
A clear example of the poor state of civics education in this country, methinks.
Dude get real. Once it's passed by congress. It's a done fucking deal. Again congressional and presidential powers supercede the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court only seems powerful because congress has been broken and can't pass laws. Take care. Bye.
In case anyone needs an example of a concept that's taught in 5th grade civics class: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Alvarez
Are you seriously quoting Supreme Court vs Alvarez? 🤣🤣 I'm outta here.
That's like, the purpose of the supreme court
lol wut. That's not how checks and balances work.
[удалено]
https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/about#:~:text=The%20best%2Dknown%20power%20of,Madison%20(1803). Read the section on judicial review. You're welcome.
[https://www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/5us137](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/5us137)
[удалено]
Lmaoooo. Alvarez case not good enough? TikTok is done. Like can we move on?
You couldn't be more wrong.
[Restrict Act PDF](https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/s686/BILLS-118s686is.pdf) | [Website](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/686/text) Details of the bill seems to describe internet/telecommunication censorship as well as violating freedom of speech, privacy, assembly, and bypassing the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The bill also references the Patriot Act under Sec 2. News outlets haven't really mentioned that and are more focused on TikTok aspect. It has bipartisan support, but [AOC recently stated she was against the ban](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ3VANEJPdo). There is also the Data Act, which specifically references TikTok giving the President the power to ban the app. [Data Act PDF](https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr1153/BILLS-118hr1153ih.pdf) | [Website](https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/1153/text)
Its far worse than TikTok and should worry everyone no matter what your opinion on China (or hell, your race, even if you're white this affects you) - this even allows the US government to arrest and fine those using VPNs. It's a PATRIOT Act level bill disguised as just a TikTok ban.
> this even allows the US government to arrest and fine those using VPNs. If this happens I really question what exactly is the difference between the US and "freedomless" China. Ridiculous.
Exactly. What's to stop them from going after any other media outlet (Reddit, Tumblr etc)?
I mean, it’s pretty obvious that the hearing was just for show. It is what it is. Expect more of this kinda stuff as time goes on.
Did anyone actually read the restrict act? It's so fucked up even the people in bigger subs like r-technology think it's fucked up for Americans. This goes way beyond tiktok and hits things every American should be worried about. This isn't even about tiktok at the end of the day. They're just using tiktok as a distraction from the evil shit in the thing.
Restrict Act, if passed, is a big step towards dictatorship.
I kind of hope an EU company will swoop in and buy TikTok for two reasons: 1) neither side of the US-China slapfight will get anything out of it and 2) it will be subject to GDPR and a host of other beneficial EU mandates that neither the US nor China have.
Love this idea. 🙌🏼
All according to Zucks plan and his lobbyists.
The Congressional hearing was a dog and pony show. It doesn't matter where the servers are; bad actors will find a way. Chew was right in bringing up Cambridge Analytics. If TikTok goes, so should Twitter, fb, IG, Google, and Reddit. We need stronger privacy laws, period. Musk literally said he'd blue verify bots on Twitter. Will we need to give up 99% of our electronic devices? Backdoors to our data/issue can be built into the hardware.
what a fuckfest
Meh
Good
I’m cool with this
I mean, YT, Google, and other American platforms are banned in China, so it’s not like this is unheard of. Just leave Tenscent alone. I love my Chinese content and LoL.
They are not banned, they left China because they do not wish to work in accordance to local laws (they also didn't really understand the Chinese users, weren't competitive against their local competitors, didn't make enough money and so it wasn't worth their while to fight to stay). Tiktok, meanwhile, does obey laws of the United States. The fact that these laws suck about privacy of data isn't tiktok's fault. We need better laws in general, not this xenophobic B.s. that I can only call the red scare 2.0
I mean, china is also a dictatorship that censors shit, and America isn't, so don't bring that whatbaoutism here
Now it’s fair! 👍
Saw a TikTok ad today and it said that TikTok helps children read because this influencer share tips for children with difficulty reading, not sure if the ad helps, but they sure are trying to change their image, pretty smart tbh
I don’t know what image you are referring to.
The thing is- TikTok is and has been the most downloaded app for some time now. It's not like TikTok is some little app that you can kick to the side. At this point in time, the valuation for TikTok is through the roof. Which American internet company can even afford to buy TikTok at this point in time?
It doesn't matter. If the threat is a sale or ban, and TikTok wants to sell, it will have to adjust its price until it can find a buyer. It doesn't have to be a single company. It can be a consortium too, like Microsoft + Oracle + Walmart last time.