#shou zi chew core

[rizzanon]

HELP im sorry the only thing i thought of was "senator im Singaporean" 😭

- 👻 anon

HAHAH PLSS i don’t blame you tho 😭

[undertale-planb-au]

海北控制论研究院向您问好

Hello everyone, I'm Meutrino, and this is our first blog of Undertale: Plan B. You might not have heard of this Undertale Alternate Universe project, but you also haven't seen its artworks.

When I first started creating this project, it was just a simple AU where Chara and Asriel survive and start kissing (in Chinese, the pinyin for "survive" is the same as "inventory," so I often made typos). At that time, I was still a carefree child in the Haihoku Territory of China, and my biggest daily pleasure was reporting to the Haihoku Cybernetics Research Institute, where academic authorities respectfully offered me Maotai (a high-proof distilled liquor that recently launched a pride flag version). The biggest difference between Chinese liquor and vodka is that they both come from non-EU countries, and one is distilled twice while the other is distilled three times.

Alas, now I'm an adult miserably stuffing cores into mangoes on an assembly line in Haihoku Territory (yes, natural mangoes have no cores—the truth about Asia that TikTok and Shou Zi Chew try to hide from you), while robot cyborgs engage in artistic creation, travel, and see psychologists.

After experiencing huge psychological trauma, I developed severe depression, to the point where I started buying the collector's edition of Undertale and using it to replace all serious political education in my family.

Speaking of my family, it's a typical Haihokuern family. My robot masters' marriage isn't happy, and they have two children. The second child, after becoming an adult, wanted to be a cyborg and transplanted many biological organs (like kidneys and livers) for herself. I respect her, but her relationship with her father is very tense, which might be some unique troubles of this era.

After my 4-hour, 3-day-a-week hard labor, I started re-creating my Undertale fan project. Now it's a serious literary work criticizing the First Path, Second Path, Third Path, and Fourth Path (it'd better we not build any fucking paths - we all use teleportation tech to move), as serious as the political education my family members received.

Hello everyone good morning, everytwo bad noon and everythree ugly evening, Zaniac here, I'm telling you that the paragraphs written by the non-Newtonian, intelligent white fluid above was nothing but bullshit, though they're nominally and actually main author of the AU. Please let me introduce it again (im)properly. Undertale: Plan B, as known as Undertale MOVIE 2 in a nutshell: Chariel deflowered, is an Undertale role-switch AU where Mx. Meu don't know how to draw Asgore thus writing him to death in a gnostic way. In this ninth art, which is not sure whether it's a game, comic or write-up, set forth on a journey across a fantasy world of Underground, where those who are determined to be chosen will be awarded "save points" to guide the third path. You will play a mysterious character named "Frisk". During the free travel, you will meet no companions with different personalities and unique abilities, and defeat powerful enemies with nobody to find lost SOULs. What, did Chara and Asriel really have deflower with each other, you ask? Check out "#ship child" in the tags, dummy.

As a triple-Z project which stands for Zero planning, Zero humanity and Zero morality, Plan B not only breaks the expectations that fanyouths have seen in their database lives, but also serves as a cybernetics clickbait for keyboard politicians who prefer to excluding discussion framework while discussing. Besides, anyone who tries to sneak peek our redesign of Asriel or other characters will be sentenced with anti-spoiler punishment because of our postponement in updating our blog. One must imagine them happy while trapped in an endless wait. As for whether this project has been a copy of other AUs, my evaluation is that the askers can refine the so-called "copy", instead of triggering their small radar just because of the similarity of the roles. Anyhow, you have to know that you have the same race setting as the other 8 billion humans in Earth Online.

[1] 兰桥. 生物质器官在机器人改造中的应用前景[J]. 海北机械工程学报, 2024, 35(2): 15-25.

[2] Tanaka S. Identity Crisis in Cyborg Society: Understanding the Mental Health of Robots with Biomass Organs[J]. Journal of Cybernetic Psychology in Kaido, 2023, 18(3): 35-45.

[3] McKarren R. The Ethical and Social Implications of Robots with Biomass Organs in Cybernetic Societies of Haihoku Region[J]. Haihoku Cynical, 2024, 22(1): 5-20.

[4] Oliveira M. A Integração de Órgãos Biomass em Robôs e o Desafio da Identificação na Sociedade Cibernética no Território de Haihoku[J]. Revista de Cibernética e Sociedade do Haihoku, 2023, 10(2): 15-30.

[5] 兰桥. 从还原主义视角看半机器人的身份认同困境与对策[J]. 海北科技哲学研究, 2023, 20(4): 25-35.

[6] Suzuki Y. Biomass Organ Implantation Technology for Robots in the Cybernetic World of Haihoku: Current Status and Future Trends[J]. Journal of Advanced Robotics Technology in Haihoku, 2024, 15(2): 10-20.

[7] Brown E. The Psychological Adaptation of Cyborgs with Biomass Organs in Haihoku's Robot - centric Communities[J]. Haihoku Journal of Behavioral Science, 2023, 12(3): 20-30.

[8] Santos L. Aspectos Legais e Sociais da Existência de Cyborgs com Órgãos Biomass no Haihoku[J]. Revista de Direito e Sociedade do Haihoku, 2024, 8(1): 5-20.

[9] 叶溪文. 海北领半机器人发展现状及社会接纳度调查研究[J]. 海北社会科学前沿, 2024, 15(1): 10-20.

[10] Yamamoto K. Strategies for Promoting the Social Acceptance of Robots with Biomass Organs in the Cybernetic Culture of Haihoku[J]. Journal of Cybernetic Culture and Communication in Haihoku, 2023, 9(2): 15-25.

[freakiwildi]

WEEK 5: [PLATFORMIZATION] SOCIAL MEDIA—THE HIDDEN WAR FOR CONTROL

Platformization isn’t just about tech—it’s about power. The term refers to how digital platforms embed themselves into economic, social, and technological structures, absorbing third-party services, data, and interactions while extracting value from them (Nieborg & Helmond, 2018). As they grow, they don’t just expand influence; they become core digital infrastructures, shaping entire societies (Plantin et al., 2016).

GOVERNMENTS AREN’T JUST USERS—THEY’RE PLAYERS IN THE GAME

No longer passive observers, governments have weaponized social media, turning it into a digital propaganda machine. Instead of relying on traditional media, they’re infiltrating platforms—adopting viral trends, creating memes, and crafting interactive content to control narratives. From Vietnam’s government running Facebook and TikTok accounts to political figures worldwide dominating Instagram and X, social media is now a battleground for public opinion and influence.

Yet, beyond the surface of catchy posts and government-backed campaigns, a far more serious conflict is unfolding—one of cybersecurity, foreign influence, and data sovereignty (Lewis, 2024; Burgess & Couts, 2025).

WHY CHINA IS DOMINATING THIS DIGITAL WAR

China understood the risks and opportunities of platformization long before the West did. Instead of allowing foreign platforms to shape its online landscape, it built The Great Firewall, banning Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Reddit, X, and WhatsApp while developing homegrown alternatives. But this wasn’t just about censorship—it was a strategic move to control data, prevent external influence, and dominate the digital space.

The tension escalated when TikTok’s CEO faced a legal battle in the U.S. from 2023 to 2024. While the official charge was child exploitation on the platform, the deeper concern was whether ByteDance, TikTok’s China-based parent company, was funneling American user data to Beijing (Congressional Research Service, 2023). Senator Tom Cotton directly suggested a link between TikTok and the Chinese government, despite CEO Shou Zi Chew’s firm denials. In the end, TikTok survived the legal attack, but the incident cemented global fears over China’s digital reach.

Vietnam isn’t exempt from these anxieties. Zalo, the country’s dominant messaging platform, is backed by Chinese investors through its parent company, VNG Corporation. While no concrete evidence of security risks exists, speculation runs rampant. Given Vietnam’s complex historical relationship with China, concerns about data vulnerability and foreign interference are impossible to ignore—especially when Zalo is widely used for business communication.

THE BIG PICTURE—SOCIAL MEDIA IS NO LONGER JUST SOCIAL

This isn’t just about censorship or internet restrictions. The fight over platforms is a fight over national security, economic control, and digital independence. Governments, corporations, and tech giants aren’t just competing for market share—they’re competing for who controls information, who owns the data, and ultimately, who shapes reality in the digital age.

REFERENCES:

Burgess, M & Couts, A 2025, ‘The Official DOGE Website Launch Was a Security Mess’, WIRED, viewed 18 February 2025, <https://www.wired.com/story/the-official-doge-website-launch-was-a-security-mess/?utm_source=chatgpt.com>.

Congressional Research Service 2023, TikTok: Recent Data Privacy and National Security Concerns, viewed <https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN12131?utm_source=chatgpt.com>.

Kimutai, JK 2014, ‘Social media and national security threats: a case study of Kenya’, erepository.uonbi.ac.ke, viewed <http://erepository.uonbi.ac.ke/handle/11295/76667>.

Lewis, JA 2024, ‘TikTok and National Security’, Csis.org, viewed <https://www.csis.org/analysis/tiktok-and-national-security?utm_source=chatgpt.com>.

Nieborg, DB & Helmond, A 2018, ‘The political economy of Facebook’s platformization in the mobile ecosystem: Facebook Messenger as a platform instance’, Media, Culture & Society, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 196–218, viewed <https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0163443718818384>.

Plantin, J-C, Lagoze, C, Edwards, PN & Sandvig, C 2016, ‘Infrastructure studies meet platform studies in the age of Google and Facebook’, New Media & Society, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 293–310, viewed <https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1461444816661553>.

[issueinside]

(US TikTok Ban: Impact on Creators and Alternative PlatformsFinancial News, Stock Analysis & Blockchain Insights | EquiFi에서)US Enforces TikTok Ban: A Major Shift in Social Media Regulation A significant change has occurred in the US as the government enforces a ban on the social media app TikTok. The move follows ongoing concerns regarding national security, data privacy, and TikTok's links to its parent company, ByteDance, based in China. The ban has affected millions of users across the country, cutting them off from a platform that has become integral to the digital culture and economy. Why Was TikTok Banned? The core reason behind the ban is the security concerns linked to TikTok’s connection to the Chinese government. US lawmakers and national security experts have raised alarms that TikTok could be used to collect personal data from American users and share it with the Chinese government, despite the app’s denial of such claims. The US government has argued that this data could be exploited for espionage or other national security threats. To avoid the ban, ByteDance was given a deadline—January 19, 2025—to sell the app to a US-based entity, which it failed to meet. This failure triggered the ban, forcing the US government to enforce the law passed last year that prohibited TikTok from operating within the country unless the Chinese company sold its operations. Supreme Court Ruling and TikTok's Response After the legal battle, the US Supreme Court upheld the law that required ByteDance to sell TikTok’s US operations. TikTok’s executives, including CEO Shou Zi Chew, have voiced their concerns about the decision, arguing that the ban violates free speech rights of the app’s 170 million American users. The company had proposed several solutions, including creating a separate US-based subsidiary to store user data, but these measures were not sufficient in the eyes of US regulators. Shou Zi Chew expressed gratitude for President Trump’s suggestion of a 90-day reprieve to give the company time to negotiate a potential solution. This extension, according to Chew, would allow ByteDance to work with the US government to address security concerns while still keeping the platform operational for users. Immediate Impact on US TikTok Users and Creators The ban’s implementation has caused immediate disruption for both regular users and content creators. TikTok was pulled from the Apple and Google app stores in the US, and videos on TikTok.com were no longer accessible. This left millions of American users without access to one of the most popular platforms for entertainment, news, and social interaction. For creators, particularly those who rely on TikTok for their income, the impact has been severe. Nicole Bloomgarden, a well-known creator, expressed how the ban would result in a significant salary cut, as many influencers depend on TikTok for brand partnerships and monetization. Other creators, like Erika Thompson, who focuses on educational content, pointed out that the loss of the platform would be detrimental to the educational community, where valuable knowledge sharing took place. Many TikTok stars took to other platforms to bid farewell to their followers, indicating the strong emotional and financial toll of the ban. Public Reactions and Political Implications The ban has sparked heated debates about freedom of expression, national security, and the role of government in regulating digital platforms. Proponents of the ban argue that the decision is necessary to protect national security and prevent foreign influence over American citizens. They believe that TikTok's access to user data could be manipulated for malicious purposes. On the other hand, critics see the ban as an overreach that stifles innovation and undermines the right to free speech. TikTok has become a crucial outlet for millions of Americans to express themselves, learn new things, and connect with others globally. Critics argue that banning the platform sets a dangerous precedent for government overreach into the digital space. At the same time, in the UK, government officials have made it clear that they do not intend to follow the US’s lead on banning TikTok for consumers. While the UK government has prohibited the app from being used on government devices due to security concerns, they have emphasized that they have no plans to ban TikTok nationwide unless a specific threat emerges that endangers national interests. This more cautious approach highlights the varying stances on TikTok’s presence across the globe. What Are the Alternatives for TikTok Users? As the ban takes effect, many TikTok users and creators are exploring alternatives. Platforms like Instagram Reels and YouTube Shorts, which offer similar video-sharing features, have seen an uptick in users migrating from TikTok. While these platforms provide similar functionality, many argue that TikTok’s unique algorithm, which helps viral content gain immense traction, sets it apart from other social media platforms. TikTok’s highly engaging user experience, built around short, creative videos, has made it difficult for other platforms to replicate its success. Creators are also considering new platforms, such as RedNote, to reach their audience. However, transitioning to new platforms presents its own set of challenges, as it’s unclear whether users will follow creators to these alternatives or if these platforms can replicate TikTok’s level of engagement. What’s Next for TikTok in the US? As President-elect Donald Trump has suggested, TikTok could receive a 90-day extension after he takes office, which would allow the company time to work out a solution with US authorities. In these next three months, ByteDance may attempt to negotiate a deal that satisfies the US government’s concerns about security without completely dismantling the app’s operations in the country. Given TikTok’s massive user base and influence on global digital culture, its future remains uncertain. The platform’s challenges in the US will likely spark further discussions about the regulation of social media and tech companies, and the broader implications for digital freedom and data security. The Global Significance of the TikTok Ban The TikTok ban is not just an isolated event but a part of a larger global conversation about the regulation of social media platforms. Governments worldwide are grappling with how to protect citizens' data from potential foreign threats while balancing the benefits of open communication and digital freedom. TikTok’s ban could be a catalyst for broader policies that affect how social media companies operate across borders, particularly as the tension between the US and China continues to evolve. For now, TikTok’s fate in the US hangs in the balance, with both legal battles and political negotiations shaping what happens next. Whether the platform can survive this challenge will have far-reaching implications for social media regulation and the digital landscape. Conclusion The US TikTok ban is a landmark moment in the intersection of technology, data privacy, and national security. As creators and users adjust to the new reality, the case also raises broader questions about the role of government in regulating the internet and the future of digital freedom. Whether or not TikTok can make a comeback in the US depends on future negotiations, but its impact on the global tech landscape is undeniable. The world will be watching closely as the situation unfolds. https://equifi.blogspot.com/2025/01/us-tiktok-ban-impact-on-creators-and.html

[gqresearch24]

TikTok Vows Legal Battle Against “Unconstitutional” Law Threatening Ban In US

In a bold move, TikTok has announced its intention to challenge in court a recent law signed by President Biden, which could potentially lead to the app being sold or banned in the United States. The legislation, aimed at TikTok’s Chinese owner ByteDance, mandates a divestment within nine months or risk being blocked in the US. TikTok’s CEO, Shou Zi Chew, asserts the law’s unconstitutionality and vows to defend the platform’s rights vigorously.

“The facts, and the Constitution, are on our side,” declared Chew in a video posted on TikTok. He rallied users to share their stories of the app’s positive impact, portraying the legislation as a direct assault on their freedom of expression. TikTok maintains its stance, vehemently denying allegations of data sharing with the Chinese government, which prompted the introduction of the law.

TikTok’s Stand Against US Legislation

The legislation, embedded within a broader package of bills including military aid for strategic partners, garnered significant bipartisan support in Congress. Lawmakers argue it is a necessary step to mitigate national security risks posed by foreign control over popular social media platforms. Senator Marco Rubio praised the move, emphasizing the need to curtail Chinese influence over American digital spaces.

Despite the legislative momentum, experts caution that the legal battle ahead for TikTok could be protracted and multifaceted. Legal challenges, likely extending to the Supreme Court, could delay any potential ban for years. Notably, previous attempts to ban TikTok within individual states have faced judicial setbacks. The platform’s immense popularity among American youth further complicates enforcement efforts, raising concerns about freedom of speech and expression rights.

 Implications and Challenges Ahead

Andrew Przybylski, an expert in human behavior and technology, highlights the potential conflict with international agreements safeguarding children’s rights to information and play. Meanwhile, regulatory scrutiny and the complexities of a potential sale present additional hurdles. Jennifer Huddleston from the Cato Institute underscores the formidable challenges any acquisition would face, questioning the feasibility of finding a suitable buyer given the app’s valuation.

As TikTok users and stakeholders brace for the uncertain outcome, Brooke Erin Duffy, a communication expert, notes the anxiety among content creators and influencers. The looming threat of a ban introduces unprecedented uncertainty into the digital ecosystem, affecting livelihoods and business ventures reliant on the platform’s reach.

The core issue driving the legislative action remains concerns over data security and potential foreign influence. While TikTok maintains its commitment to safeguarding user data, skepticism persists, fueled by geopolitical tensions between the US and China. In parallel, regulatory actions in the European Union underscore global concerns over digital platforms’ impact on society, signaling a broader reckoning with online content and engagement practices.

As the legal battle unfolds, the fate of TikTok hangs in the balance, embodying larger debates surrounding technology, national security, and individual freedoms in the digital age.

[irresponsibleink]

The TikTok Ban: Everything We Know

Highlights 

The House of Representatives has passed a bill that would require Beijing-based company ByteDance to sell TikTok or it will lose access to app stores in the United States. 

The bill will now go on to the Senate.

The CEO denies its users’ data is in danger. 

ByteDance will have six months to sell the app if the bill is passed. 

TikTok is one of the most influential social media apps to hit the market. The app has over 100 million active users in the US, which is why a lot of Americans can’t help but feel invested in this new situation. For those of you living under a rock, the House of Representatives has just signed a bill to ban TikTok in the US. Why? Because it is owned by ByteDance, a company based in Beijing, China, which is a problem according to US officials.

The concern is that TikTok could give the data of American users to the Chinese government, or possibly influence US citizens through the algorithm. This isn’t the first time lawmakers have tried to shut down the app, which is why TikTok adopted an initiative called Project Texas in 2022, to safeguard American users' data on servers in the US. Despite this, TikTok would have to give their users’ data to the Chinese government if they so demanded. 

Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal said, “The Chinese Communists are weaponizing information that they are constantly, surreptitiously collecting from 170 million Americans and potentially aiming that information, using it through algorithms at the core of American democracy.” 

(Sen. Richard Blumenthal)

Many are displeased. Many TikTok users are arguing that this is a violation of the First Amendment, and since there is a lot of chatter on TikTok about the situation in Gaza, many are saying it is a way for the government to silence negative talk about Israel. This is not an unjustified concern, as Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton said that TikTok has a “clear skew in pro-Hamas propaganda on TikTok versus other social media apps.”

So, what does it mean if this bill gets passed? ByteDance will have six months to sell the app. If they do not, it will be removed from app stores in the US, and its website will become inaccessible. Now, there is no way to make the app disappear from everyone’s phones, but since the app will be removed from the app store, this means you can no longer download updates, meaning that over time the app will become glitchy and borderline unusable. You could still access the app through a VPN, though this will be illegal. 

How is TikTok responding? Well, they are not taking this lying down. In the past, they have challenged similar moves in court and they've confirmed that they will challenge this one as well, and they have also confirmed that they have no plans to sell the app. Shou Zi Chew, CEO of the company, has also made several statements voicing his displeasure at the recent events and doing his best to assure Americans that their data is safe. 

(TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew)

So, what happens next? The bill will be reviewed by the Senate, where it will have a long fight before it can be passed. President Biden has already confirmed he will sign the bill if it is given to him. Though many TikTokers in the US are concerned, there is still a lot that will have to happen for TikTok to be banned in the US.

Rick Stepp (calebstepp23@gmail.com)

Sources available upon request. 

[xtruss]

Chinaphobia: China Has Been Waging a Decades-Long, All-Out Spy War

While the West was distracted, the Chinese government began an intelligence assault that never stopped.

— March 28, 2023 | By Calder Walton | Foreign Policy

Foreign Policy Illustration

One week ago, TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew was questioned by members of the U.S. Congress, before the world’s media, about whether the Chinese government uses the wildly popular video-sharing app to spy on Americans. His testimony came several weeks after the appearance of a Chinese spy balloon floating across the United States. What are we to make of these two stories, which are at their core both about Chinese espionage?

To borrow a phrase from Mission: Impossible: Relax, it’s much worse than you think. We are now witnessing some of the effects of a decision made years ago by China to use every means and medium of intelligence-gathering at its disposal against the West. Its strategy can be summarized in three words: collect, collect, collect. Most Westerners do not yet appreciate just how sweeping China’s intelligence onslaught directed at their countries is; for decades, their own governments likewise didn’t understand because their attention was largely directed elsewhere.

After 9/11, the U.S. intelligence community was overwhelmingly geared toward counterterrorism. U.S. spy chiefs followed priorities for this agenda set by decision-makers in Washington. The U.S. government’s strategic focus on combating terrorism took place at the expense of focusing on resurgent states such as China and Russia. As we pass the 20th anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, it is useful to understand how China’s intelligence and national security establishment reacted at the time.

The strategy that China’s Ministry of State Security (MSS), its principal civilian intelligence service, took toward the United States after 9/11 followed a Chinese saying, ge an guan huo, which roughly translates as “watch the fires burn from the safety of the opposite river bank, which allows you to avoid entering the battle until your enemy is exhausted.” The MSS followed this saying to a T. Its long-term aim was to contain the United States, and then supplant it, in Southeast Asia. As the United States was mired in the Middle East, the gains being made by the MSS went by largely undetected or appreciated by U.S. intelligence.

Beginning in 2005, the MSS declared war on the U.S. intelligence community. From that point on, all of the service’s best resources and personnel were marshaled against U.S. intelligence—while the United States was pivoting to the global war on terrorism. According to one CIA official with deep expertise on China, with whom I had an exclusive interview on condition of anonymity, internal MSS deliberations from that time were marked with glee as the U.S. government was consumed, if not distracted, by the global war on terrorism.

Chinese intelligence was soon winning its war on U.S. spies. As previously reported in these pages, in 2010 the MSS dismantled a major CIA network being run from its station in Beijing. It reportedly led to the killing or imprisonment of more than a dozen CIA sources in China over more than two years. Details about how Chinese intelligence compromised the U.S. network remain murky. It seems, however, that the MSS hacked into the CIA’s supposedly secure communication channels. There are also whispers that the network may have been compromised by a human agent—a mole, to use John le Carré’s phrase—in the CIA. That person may have been Jerry Lee, a former CIA case officer working on Chinese affairs. After leaving the CIA, Lee sold U.S. secrets to Chinese intelligence. He was later caught—a U.S. counterintelligence success—and in 2019 was sentenced to 19 years in prison. There is little information in the public domain about what secrets Lee delivered to his Chinese handlers.

At this point, you might well say, fair enough—spies spy, just as robbers rob. Perhaps China has been doing what all states do, only better? This might be called the realist school of espionage in international affairs. Such a line of thought about China, usually said with a shrug, is misleading, however. China’s intelligence services operate in a fundamentally different way from those in the West—in nature, scope, and scale.

Unlike those in Western democracies, China’s intelligence services are not held to account by independent political bodies or the public, nor are they subject to the rule of law. Instead, the Chinese government fuses together a “whole of society” approach for collecting intelligence. This sets it apart from anything undertaken by Western governments. Chinese intelligence and commerce are integrated in ways without comparison in the West. Contrary to what may be thought, the U.S. government does not conduct industrial espionage to advantage U.S. businesses. In China, by contrast, thanks to successive national security legislation passed under President Xi Jinping, Chinese businesses are required to work with its intelligence services whenever requested to do so. They are effectively silent partners in Chinese commerce with the outside world. Another difference between Chinese intelligence and Western powers concerns what those in the spy world call ubiquitous technical surveillance. Facial recognition, phone apps, and CCTV all make China an infinitely harder target for Western agencies to collect intelligence on than Chinese services’ targets in open Western democracies. A fundamental asymmetry thus exists in the shadowy intelligence battles between China and the West.

China’s foreign intelligence offensive has reached new levels since Xi took power in 2012. Its purpose involves what all intelligence agencies do: to understand the intentions and capabilities of foreign adversaries. But China’s offensive goes much further: to steal as many scientific and technical secrets from Western powers, principally the United States, as possible to advance China’s position as a superpower—challenging and overtaking the United States on the world stage.

China’s Unprecedented Economic Boom This Century Has Been Fueled By an Equally Unprecedented Theft of Western Science and Technology.

China’s unprecedented economic boom this century has been fueled by an equally unprecedented theft of Western science and technology. Back in 2012, the director of the U.S. National Security Agency warned that cyber-espionage constituted the greatest transfer of wealth in history. China was—and remains—the greatest perpetrator. Beginning around 2013 or 2014, Chinese operatives carried out a massive hack of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which holds some of the most sensitive information in the U.S. federal government: information obtained during security clearances. This information is that which people often hide from their nearest and dearest—extramarital affairs and such. Chinese intelligence thus has millions of datapoints for potential blackmail, what the Russians call kompromat, to recruit agents with access to U.S. secrets. The OPM haul was followed, in 2017, by China’s hack of the credit rating bureau Equifax, which gave China sensitive data on approximately 150 million Americans. If you are an American, it is more likely than not that China has sensitive data about you.

Then there are Chinese businesspeople who in reality are undercover MSS operatives. Take the example of Yanjun Xu, an MSS officer (not just an agent) who posed as a businessman to steal U.S. aviation trade secrets. He was caught and is now in prison. Xu is hardly alone. A common tactic on the part of the MSS is to dangle a lucrative deal to U.S. businesses, obtain a target’s underlying intellectual property, scuttle the deal, but keep the IP and manufacture the product. In some cases, the Chinese intelligence front companies sell the product back to the original target market.

According to the FBI, in 2021 it was opening a China-related investigation every 12 hours. Even Britain’s traditionally secretive services—MI5, MI6, and GCHQ—have now come out of the shadows and publicly warned about the threat posed by Chinese espionage.

The above, then, is the real context for China’s spy balloon this year. Certainly, balloons seem so last century—or even the century before. But that should not fool us about their capabilities. According to Western signals intelligence officials with whom I have spoken, China’s balloon was equipped with state-of-the-art sensors capable of eavesdropping on electronic signals from near space that satellites could not.

Aerial reconnaissance has a proven track record. After World War II, as the Cold War set in, the newly founded CIA suffered a succession of human intelligence failures in heavily guarded police states behind the Iron Curtain. It was largely due to those failures that the CIA pioneered the use of overhead reconnaissance. In 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower authorized the CIA to develop a top-secret spy plane, the U-2. Subsequent U-2 flights allowed U.S. intelligence to peer inside the otherwise dark interior of the Soviet Union.

Aerial Reconnaissance Has a Proven Track Record.

Papers held at the Eisenhower Presidential Library show the value of U-2 intelligence given to the small circle of those in Washington indoctrinated into its secrets. U-2 overflights of the Soviet bloc revealed that the “missile gap”—the claim that the United States trailed the Soviet Union in missile development—was erroneous. In May 1960, one of the CIA’s U-2s, flown by Francis Gary Powers, was shot down over the Soviet Union. Believing the pilot had been killed, Eisenhower authorized a cover story, similar to China’s recent claims about its balloon: that the U-2 plane was a U.S. weather-monitoring aircraft that had strayed off course. When Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev announced to the world that Powers was in fact alive, and in Soviet custody, Eisenhower was left scrambling. The CIA gave a closed briefing to Congress about the U-2 program. The CIA’s head, Allen Dulles, was surprised to receive a standing applause from the senators briefed. Eisenhower, however, chose not to reveal to Americans at large the nature of the U-2 program, not wanting to reveal U.S. intelligence sources and methods. That was understandable, but it was also a missed opportunity. It is likely that, if they had known about it, Americans would have rallied behind the U-2 program as Congress did.

The U-2 program continued after the shootdown, playing a major role during the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962. Thereafter, both sides of the Cold War, East and West, threw increasing resources to collect intelligence from even higher overhead—space. Both sides of the Cold War relied on technical intelligence collection, from satellites and overflights, about each other’s arsenals. This made it possible for each side to verify the other’s compliance with arms reduction treaties in the later years of the Cold War. Without what was euphemistically called “national technical means”—a combination of signals intelligence, imagery intelligence, and that gleaned from electronic emissions—such arms reduction treaties would have been impossible. Those treaties, backed by mutual Eastern and Western intelligence collection, helped to stabilize the Cold War.

We should not, therefore, be surprised in principle that China would be using overhead platforms to collect intelligence. The United States has done it in the past—and it proved useful. What is surprising is how relatively easy the U.S. government has made it for the Chinese government to steal secrets in key U.S. sectors.

You can’t blame a wolf for going after chickens in a coop—especially if the door is left open. A recent report by Strider Technologies, an open-source strategic intelligence start-up, has revealed how Chinese scientists were able to obtain valuable research and development (R&D) from Los Alamos, home to the U.S. government’s cutting-edge laboratories. The report—which also demonstrates the power of open-source intelligence in today’s digital world—reveals that Chinese scientists at Los Alamos brought R&D from there back to China, which the Chinese government then used in defense technologies such as hypersonics. In some instances, the Chinese scientists at Los Alamos had been funded by U.S. research grants. The United States was thus effectively funding its own competitive disadvantage with China in these sectors.

Cold wars tend to start before Western countries are prepared. Intelligence records reveal that in 1945 the Soviet government was effectively already engaged in a cold war with its Western counterparts. This was based on its long-term ideological opposition to capitalist powers and Soviet leader Joseph Stalin’s belief that he had to contain them. Before and during World War II, Soviet intelligence undertook an unprecedented espionage offensive against Western powers—including the Soviet Union’s wartime allies Britain and the United States—to collect political intelligence and steal as many scientific and technical secrets as possible. Soviet spy chiefs were pushing at an open door as their Western allies were distracted, if not consumed, by fighting the Axis powers. By the end of World War II, Soviet spies had acquired secrets of the nuclear bomb, whose later development would shape postwar international security. Soviet agents had also penetrated the most sensitive parts of Western governments. This allowed Stalin to calibrate his strategies toward his former wartime Western allies—who were never his allies in the sense they thought—based on secrets from the inside. Western powers were ill-equipped for a struggle they were already in by 1945.

History may not repeat itself, but it does rhyme. There are rhymes with the Cold War and U.S.-China relations today. As in the Cold War, from the view of intelligence and national security, the United States is already in a cold war with China. Like the last century’s superpower conflict, Western intelligence agencies are again racing to recalibrate and catch up.

Chinese Spies are Real in The Same Way Soviet Agents Were Real.

The Cold War offers two warnings. First, Chinese spies are real in the same way Soviet agents were real. An uncomfortable public policy conversation is urgently needed about the nature of Chinese students, academics, and businesspeople—some of whom may have malign intentions—as well as talent programs and cultural outreach programs in the United States. But that does not mean that Americans who happen to be of Chinese heritage are spies, any more so than left-leaning Americans were Soviet agents.

Second, sunlight is the best disinfectant. The U.S. government must be transparent about its knowledge of Chinese intelligence. If such information is not forthcoming—and scrutinized, debated, and challenged—there is a real prospect of another McCarthyite witch hunt. Today, Chinese Americans are often the victims of the Chinese government and its intelligence services. Finding the balance between security and civil liberties is our challenge ahead. China will continue to spy, using all means available—balloons, businesses, and bytes. We need to determine what trade-offs we are willing to put up with between security and civil liberties.

Now is a moment for nuance, not grandstanding. TikTok provides the Chinese government with a potential platform to collect intelligence on Americans, behind the endless videos posted on it. It also offers the Chinese government the opportunity to shape public opinion. So far, however, it has not been demonstrated in Congress that TikTok actually does either. TikTok should certainly be banned from phones carrying Western state secrets because of the potential for Chinese espionage, but its wholesale ban in the United States is so far not justified on national security grounds. Unless or until evidence emerges that TikTok constitutes more than a potential security threat at large, it is surely the right of Americans to post as many videos as they want online and potentially have their data mined in China if they wish.

— Calder Walton is a historian at the Harvard Kennedy School. He is the author of the forthcoming Spies: The Epic Intelligence War Between East and West.

[college-girl199328]

Skeptical U.S. lawmakers grill TikTok CEO over safety, content

U.S. lawmakers on Thursday pressed Shou Zi Chew over data security and harmful content, responding skeptically during a tense committee hearing to his assurances that the hugely popular video-sharing app prioritizes user safety and should not be banned due to its Chinese connections.

In a bipartisan effort to rein in the power of a social media platform, Republican and Democratic lawmakers hurled questions on topics, including TikTok's content moderation practices, how the company plans to secure American data from Beijing, and its spying on journalists.

Chew spent most of the hearing attempting to push back assertions that TikTok, or its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, are tools of the Chinese government. But he failed to answer uncomfortable questions about human rights abuses committed by China against the taken aback by a TikTok video displayed by one lawmaker that advocated for violence against the House committee holding the hearing.

The rare public appearance by the 40-year-old Singapore native comes at a crucial time for the company. TikTok has ballooned its American user base to 150 million in a few short years dominance is being treated by a potential nationwide ban in the U.S. and growing fears among officials about protecting user data from China's communist government.

There's also symbolism for lawmakers in taking on TikTok, which has been swept up in a geopolitical battle between Beijing and Washington over trade and technology, as well as heightened tensions due to recent balloon politics and China's relationship with Russia.

“Mr. Chew, you are here because the American people need the truth about the threat TikTok poses to our national and personal security,” Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Republican, said in her opening statement.

Chew told the House Committee on Energy and Commerce that TikTok the safety of its young users and denied it's a national security risk. He reiterated the company's plan to protect U.S. user data by storing it on servers maintained and owned by the software giant Oracle.

“Let me state this unequivocally: ByteDance is not an agent of China or any other country,” Chew said the company has been dogged by claims that its Chinese ownership means user data could end up in the hands of the Chinese government or that it could be used to promote narratives favorable to the communist leaders.

In 2019, the Guardian reported that TikTok was instructing its moderators to censor videos that mention Tiananmen Square and included images unfavorable to the Chinese government. The platform says it has since changed its moderation practices.

Concerns about the platform increased when ByteDance admitted in December that it fired four employees last summer who accessed data on two journalists and people connected to them while attempting to uncover the source of a leaked report about the company.

Aware of its weakness, TikTok has been trying to distance itself from its Chinese origins, saying 60% of ByteDance is owned by global institutional investors such as Carlyle Group.

“Ownership is not at the core of addressing these concerns,” Chew said many others, it is. The Biden administration has reportedly demanded that Chinese owners sell their stakes in the company to avoid a nationwide ban. China has said it would oppose those attempts. Meanwhile, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said at a separate committee hearing Thursday that he believes TikTok is a security threat and “should be ended one way or another.”

In one of the most dramatic moments of the hearing, Republican Rep. Kat Cammack played a TikTok video showing a shooting gun with a caption that included the House committee with the exact date before it was formally announced.

“You expect us to believe that you are capable of maintaining the data security, privacy, and security of 150 million Americans where you even protect the people in this room,” Cammack said.

TikTok said the company on Thursday removed the video and banned the account that posted it about what kind of content Americans encounter or how their data is collected by technology companies, which isn't new. Congress has to curtail the amount of data tech companies collect on consumers through a national privacy law, but those efforts have failed.

At a news conference on Wednesday, Rep. Jamaal Bowman, a New York Democrat and one of the few allies TikTok seemingly has on the Hill, said lawmakers concerned about protecting users shouldn't target but must instead focus on a national law that would protect user data across all social media platforms. Chew also noted the failure of U.S. social media companies to address the very concerns for which TikTok was being criticized.

“American social companies have a good track record with data privacy and user security,” he said. “Look at Facebook and Cambridge Analytica, just one example.”

Committee members also showed a host of TikTok videos that encouraged users to harm themselves and commit suicide. Many questioned why the platform's Chinese counterpart, Douyin, does not carry the same potentially dangerous content as the American product.

Chew responded that it depends on the laws of the app operating. He said the company has about 40,000 moderators that track harmful content and an algorithm that flags material.

Wealth management firm Wedbush described the hearing as a “disaster” for TikTok that made a ban more likely if it from its Chinese parent Investors Service, said a ban would benefit TikTok rivals YouTube, Instagram, and Snap, “likely resulting in the higher revenue share of the total advertising wallet.”

To avoid a ban, TikTok has been trying to sell officials on a $1.5 billion plan, Project Texas, which routes all U.S. user data to servers owned and maintained by the software giant Oracle.

As of October, all new U.S. user data was being stored inside the country. The company started deleting all historic U.S. user data from non-Oracle servers expected to be completed this year, Chew said.

Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw noted that regardless of what the company does to assure lawmakers it will protect U.S. user data, the Chinese government can still have significant influence over its parent company and ask it to turn over data through its national security laws.

Congress, the White House, the U.S. armed forces, and half of U.S. states have the app from official devices. Similar bans have been imposed in other countries in the European Union.

A complete TikTok ban in the U.S. would risk political backlash from its young user base and civil liberties groups government intelligence officer who runs the cybersecurity company said he agrees to restrict TikTok access on government-issued phones ban might be too extreme.

“We have Tesla in China, Microsoft in China, Apple in China. Are they going to start banning us now?” Kennedy said. “It could escalate very quickly.”