#chinese apps banned

[cuchufletapl]

This doesn't concern me much because I'm a EU citizen and also be it far from me to defend TikTok as a company, but some moments at the US Congressional hearing are so ridiculous (on the part of the Congressmen) that I can't help but follow this thing. Honestly I feel for the TikTok CEO. The patience of that man, I would've started yelling three questions in.

[steevejr]

freaks on here will be like *google screenshot of misinformation* *google screenshot of misinformation* stay safe kiddos! *link to an article that refutes all the claims they made if you actually read it which op clearly didnt*

[socialistexan]

Some things I think people are overlooking in the tiktok ban bill, because it's not just a tiktok ban:

It gives the US government the ability to ban *any* app, website, or company they believe to be "controlled" by an "adversarial power" which can change whenever they want

It allows the President and the Administrative branch almost unilateral power to designate *any* app, website, or company to be under the control of an "adversarial power" (and just think about how that can be used un the hands of, say, Donald Trump or Ron DeSantis)

They have to offer little to no evidence for this. For example, tiktok - a Singaporean-headquartered and ran company, partially owned by US interests, incorporated in the Cayman Islands, and whose userdata is stored Austin, TX - is apparently controlled by the Chinese government

It also gives the Federal Government the ability to investigate and shut down any provider who gives access to these banned websites or services, including VPN. They will have unilateral power to dismantle VPNs through outrageous fines what will essentially force them to not operate in the US

A lot of the Congressional Representatives who supported this bill have large donors and/or stock in US Tech companies like Meta, Google, or Palantier who would benefit from the downfall of tiktok or the ability to purchase it and monopolize the market

Those same tech companies which sell our data constantly anyway, including to "adversarial powers"

This is so much more than just a tiktok ban.

[chinablogger-blog]

Indian Government Bans Chinese-linked Betting and Loan Apps

The Indian government has taken a major step to ban 230 apps, which include 138 betting and gambling apps, and 94 lending apps. The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeiTY) is in the process of implementing the ban immediately, acting upon the recommendation from the Ministry of Home Affairs.

According to a government source, these apps were maintained by foreign entities and include Chinese entities. Almost all of Chinese entities are controlled by the Chinese communist party, and the party would have access to user data through these apps.

The apps could collect users’ location data, browsing data, contact information and enable developing profiles for espionage purposes. They could also collect sensitive national security information from government employees. These apps, would therefore, pose a national security threat.

The apps could use user data to influence people by promoting some content, while censoring other information. Section 69 of IT Law allows government to ban such apps that pose national security threats.

The lending apps were operating with a lack of transparency and customers were taking out huge loans without realizing the proper terms and conditions. These apps charged high interest rates up to 3000 percent. When customers were unable to repay, the representatives would resort to harassment, which include threats to release their morphed photos.

A series of suicide incidents of people who have lost money in betting, or taken huge loans occurred in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. The state governments have reported the cases and urged the central government to take action on the apps. On investigating, it was found that there were 288 such apps, with 94 of them on the app store, while others were available through third-party links.

In the past, the Indian government banned many Chinese apps including TikTok, PUBZ, Xender, Shien, Garena Free Fire, Canscanner etc. that gather users’ sensitive data, and are detrimental to the country’s sovereignty and integrity.

View on Wordpress

[newsbites]

[probablyasocialecologist]

The current rhetoric against TikTok is not only a hypocritical attack on free speech, it’s an insinuation that the only reason people could be critical of Israel is manipulation by a foreign government. There’s no way people from all walks of life could simply be horrified by what’s happening in Gaza; those devilish Chinese Communists must be warping their minds. In fact, the Washington Post found that TikTok was not even unique among social networks for the gap between pro-Palestine and pro-Israel support in public posts. It said: But Facebook and Instagram, TikTok’s US-based rivals, show a remarkably similar gap, their data show. On Facebook, the #freepalestine hashtag is found on more than 11 million posts—39 times more than those with #standwithisrael. On Instagram, the pro-Palestinian hashtag is found on 6 million posts, 26 times more than the pro-Israel hashtag. Any move by elected officials to ban TikTok should be taken seriously; it’s not just about the app’s videos about terrible first dates and secret menu items. Free speech is a principle. When so-called defenders of free speech advocate censorship because they find certain political ideas too dangerous, be very worried.

[zvaigzdelasas]

A bipartisan House bill unveiled Tuesday would force ByteDance, the China-based parent company of TikTok, to divest the shortform video app or face a ban of the platform in the U.S.

Introduced by Reps. Mike Gallagher (R-Wisc.) and Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), the top lawmakers on the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, is the latest effort to ban TikTok over concerned about potential national security threats posed by ByteDance.

The “Protecting Americans From Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act” specifically defines ByteDance and TikTok as a foreign adversary controlled application. The bill also creates a broader framework that would allow the president to designate other foreign adversary controlled applications. [...]

The bill would give ByteDance more than five months after the law would goes into effect to divest TikTok. If the company does not divest from TikTok, it would become illegal to distribute it through an app store or web hosting platform in the U.S., effectively banning it even among current users.

The bill has more than a dozen bipartisan co-sponsors, with an even split down party lines, according to a committee aide. The aide declined to share the names of specific sponsors.

“This bill is an outright ban of TikTok, no matter how much the authors try to disguise it. This legislation will trample the First Amendment rights of 170 million Americans and deprive 5 million small businesses of a platform they rely on to grow and create jobs,” TikTok spokesperson Alex Haurek told The Hill.

A Republican-backed bill last year attempted to ban TikTok outright but faced pushback from Democrats, who said the effort was rushed and could impede on free speech rights.

5 Mar 24

[decolonize-the-everything]

So we all know that Tik tok is bad and steals info, right?

Right okay.

And I became so normalized to like yeah I have no privacy online no big deal.

So when I saw one of my mutuals from here show up on my list of friends to follow on tik tok I didn't think much of it.

Today though I decided to figure out like how insidious it is. Cuz the people showing up as friends... I don't dm them, I'm not regularly reblogging from them or anything. We're just mutuals.

And tik tok picked that up. I follow thousands of people and thousands follow me. So... How insane is their data collection?

I stumbled onto this article which answered my question.

It's about this guy who reverse engineers apps explaining what he found when he reverse engineered tik tok. Obligatory disclaimer: this article is two years old However still fairly accurate as tik tok hasn't changed that much.

He explained all this in a reddit thread so I'll share the screenshots from the article

“TikTok might not meet the exact criteria to be called “Malware”, but it’s definitely nefarious and (in my humble opinion) outright evil,” Bangorlol said. “There’s a reason governments are banning it. Don’t use the app. Don’t let your children use it. Tell your friends to stop using it. It offers you nothing but a quick source of entertainment that you can get elsewhere without handing your data over to the Chinese government. You are directly putting yourself and those on your network (work and home) at risk.”

And like yeah that's really invasive right. But like no they aren't just looking at follower counts and app usage from other apps. They see Actual real data on them. How else would they know which of my followers interact with me most out of the thousands of followers I have?

And how much info are they getting from the data they sift through?

How many of you don't have tik tok but still have your name, age, and some traits, maybe a DNI in your bio? How many of my followers don't have tik tok, but now tik tok has access to you through my Tumblr? How's that make you feel? Is tik tok taking the interests of people I follow into consideration when it's figuring out what videos to show me?

Are they looking at Your interests to help zero in on mine?

°•°•°•°•°

If you like my posts consider leaving a tip

[the1entirecircus]

The TikTok ban in America is making me so angry. There are hundreds, if not thousands of different thing the US government can do to help people, and what do they do? They ban a silly app meant to entertain because they think the Chinese government is spying through it.

[avelera]

I've been talking with a few people irl about the TikTok ban and I was wondering if I could get your take on it? (iirc you work in election security). Mainly I'd like to know why TikTok/China is *uniquely* bad wrt dating mining/potential election interference when we've seen other companies/governments do the same thing (thinking of the Russian psyops here on Tumblr in 2016). It feels like the scope is so narrow that it doesn't come close to targeting the root problem (user privacy and data mining as a whole), leading me to think it's only point is "ooh China Scary". Thoughts? (No worries if you'd rather not get into it, I just thought of you as someone who might have more insight/informed opinions on the matter).

So I'm not really familiar with all the details of the case and certainly not all the details of the bill. But I will give my perspective:

TikTok as a particular threat to users' data and privacy has been known for some time in the cybersecurity world. US government employees and contractors have been straight-up forbidden to have it on their phones for some time now. I, for example, have never had it on my phone because of these security concerns. (Worth noting, I'm not a government employee or contractor, it was just a known-to-be dangerous app in the cybersecurity world so I avoided it.)

This is because the parent company, as I understand, has known connections to the Chinese government that have been exploited in the past. For example, to target journalists.

Worth noting, another app that would potentially be on the chopping block is WeChat, which also has close ties to (or is outright owned by?) the Chinese government. This is just speculation on my part but it's based on the fact that all the concerns around TikTok are there for WeChat too and it has also been banned on government devices in some states, so I imagine it would be next if the bill passes.

I think this is important to note because I've seen some hot takes here on Tumblr have said that the entire case against TikTok is made up and there is no security threat. That is simply not true. The concerns have been there for a while.

However, the question of what to do about it is a thorny one.

The determination seems to be that so long as TikTok is still owned by its parent company with its direct ties to the Chinese government, there really is no way to guarantee that it's safe to use. From that angle, demanding that the company sever ties and set up some form of local ownership makes sense.

I am not a lawyer, but, that being said, forcing them to sell their local operations to a locally-based buyer is a pretty invasive and unusual step for legislators to take against a private company, even in a clear case of spying. I'm sure TikTok's widespread popularity is a big part of the threat it poses, which lends to the argument used to justify such an extreme step. (Because it is on so many phones, it really could be a danger to national security.)

That said, at one point young activists on TikTok embarrassed Trump (lots of good context in this article) while he was campaigning in 2020, and there was some talk then about shutting it down which seemed pretty clearly linked to how it was used as a platform to organize against him. I'm sure there's at least some right wing antipathy towards the app that has a political basis going back to this event. Trump signed an executive order banning it, the ban going into effect got bogged down in the courts, and then Biden rescinded that executive order when he got into office, pending an investigation into the threat it posed.

Those investigations seem to have further confirmed that the Chinese government is getting access to US user data through the app, and further confirmed it as a security threat.

Now, to muddy the waters further, there's several dodgy investment funds including one owned by former Secretary of the Treasury to Trump Steven Mnuchin that are circling with an interest to buy TikTok if it does sell. That's very concerning.

Funds like Mnuchin's interest in purchasing TikTok (even though they do invest in other technologies too, so it is in their portfolio) definitely makes the motivations behind the sale look pretty damning as momentum builds, that it could be some sort of money grab here in the US.

China has also pointed out that forcing the sale of a company because of spying concerns like this opens a whole can of worms. If China thinks that, say, Microsoft is spying on their citizens, could they force the US company to sell its operations in China to a Chinese investor? Could they force Google? Could they even further polarize the internet in general between "free" and "not free" (as in, behind the great Chinese or Russian firewall, as examples) if this precedent is set, so that no Western companies can operate in authoritarian states without selling their local operations there to a government-controlled organization, and thus be unable protect their users there? Or, if you don't have so rosy a view of Western companies, could it effectively deal a blow to international trade in general by saying you have to have to sell any overseas arms of a company to someone who is from there? Again, I'm not a lawyer, but this is a hell of a can of worms to open.

But again, this is muddy because China absolutely is spying on TikTok users. The security reason for all of this is real. What to do about it is the really muddled part that has a ton of consequences, and from that angle I agree with people who are against this bill. Tons of bad faith consequences could come out of it. But the concerns kicking off the bill are real.

[qqueenofhades]

People are apparently saying "well I'm not gonna vote/vote for trump if tik tok is banned!"

I'm pretty sure they were already going to do that, this is just their excuse of the week

But more importantly, if a stupid app matters more to you than the actual lives trump and the republicans will deliberately destroy, well that says more about them don't it?

But wait... I thought they weren't going to vote because of Gaza/because Biden hasn't personally forgiven THEIR student loan/because something something corporate centrism/because something something garble garble??! Does this mean their excuses just change by the week according to whatever's in the headlines and have no actual logical coherence or adherence to a guiding principle? Surely you jest, good internet sir and/or madam. Shocking.

Anyway, also... they realize that this effort is being spearheaded by Republicans and is pretty transparently an attempt to get another huge social media platform (after the Bird App Formerly Known as Twitter) into the ownership of an ex-Trump Cabinet official and an investor group with Russian ties? And that voting for Trump would directly play into those people's hands? And that... wait, never mind. I still expect logic or reason to have any place in this discussion, and it doesn't. Just tell me Why They Aren't Voting For Biden!!! next week and maybe I can get ahead of the curve for once.

This, however, is likewise why I oppose this rushed and Republican-driven move to "ban TikTok!!" in a highly consequential election year and think somebody needs to talk some sense into Biden and/or the Senate that this is a stupid idea and should be shelved (or at the least, heavily revised or modified). Yes, TikTok being owned by a group with Chinese government ties isn't great, but there's no morally pure ultra-megacorp that's going to rush in to fill the void. Forcing the Chinese owners to divest will just create an opening for Trump's ex-Treasury Secretary and his Russian businessmen buddies to step in instead, and I don't know about you, but I don't think that's a net positive in terms of keeping Americans' personal data out of the hands of hostile foreign entities. We already have Musk shilling for the alt-right and the Russian government every chance he gets, using Twitter to prop up their narratives and their operations, and selling TikTok to a Trump/Russian-linked consortium in fucking 2024 would be an incredibly massive own goal and give MAGA and company virtually hegemonic control over American social media content. That is why I think this is a stupid idea and should be opposed, but also, I agree that people who are using this as their Excuse of the Week to not vote were deeply, deeply unlikely to vote in the first place.

This is also a perfect example of why "well now I won't vote >:[!!!!" as a threat/temper tantrum backfires every single time. If there are young people who are concerned about TikTok possibly being banned, and their response is to immediately throw temper tantrums about not voting, all that does is reinforce to elected officials that young people never vote, there is no need to make legislation that champions their interests, and they don't need to fear any electoral backlash because these people have already spent years announcing their intention to Not Vote at every opportunity and clearly aren't about to start now. They remove themselves further from the civic process at every turn, and they reinforce the narrative that young people as a group are not worth having their concerns or ideas prioritized, because even when politicians do other things that young people like and/or support, young people are poised to turn against them and urge No Vote!!! :( at the drop of a fucking hat. So, yeah. "Don't vote!" is always a stupid and self-defeating message, but I can't see how it's possibly supposed to convince politicians that a group of people already predisposed not to vote is going to make any difference from what they already do. So yeah. Like. Not that this surprises me, but it's literally the same threat they've echoed at every single turn, doesn't represent anything new, and will probably be changed 10 times before the election anyway.

[ikemenfangirl]

Beyond the World (世界之外) Otome game

"The world is infinite, and we will meet again eventually."

💕 Reincarnation in an infinite world with him.

เตรียมเปิดบริการเกมรักไม่สิ้นสุด Beyond the World คุณและเขาที่วนเวียนเกิดใหม่และผูกพันกันในโลกที่แตกต่าง

“โลกอันไม่มีที่สิ้นสุด และเราจะได้พบกันใหม่ในท้ายที่สุด”

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

Game: Beyond the World

By: NetEase

Store: Mainland China

Language: Simplified Chinese

Website: https://world.163.com

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

Unlock the romance 2024 !

Every parting is just a break.

We will meet again according to destiny.

(ทุกการพรากจากกันเป็นเพียงการหยุดพัก เราจะได้พบกันใหม่ด้วยพรหมลิขิต)

★ WORLD and CONCEPT

In Beyond the world, the protagonist is always you.

This heart-pounding journey under the extreme heartbeat will revolve around you.

※ female protagonist.

★ CHARACTERS

：GuShiye

：YiYu

：BaiYuan

：XiaXiaoyin

iOS pre - reg.

🔗 : https://apps.apple.com/cn/app/id6474127167 (Chinese App Store)

💥 Google Play bans China, Android users can download from the official site or TapTap.

File Size : 1.12 GB.

[gallifreyriver]

Update to this post because a year later they're still trying it.

They vote again tomorrow, March 13th, to try and ban TikTok- only this time they're doing all they can to claim it's not a TikTik ban.

They claim it's to "protect Americans from 'Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications'" despite singling out ByteDance/TikTok specifically, and mentioning TikTok in literally the first sentence.

They also claim it's not a "ban," they're just giving TikTok the "opportunity" to divest from ByteDance and sell it's company, algorithms and source code to a non-communist county (the US) within 180 days or the US will take action and make the app inaccessible to USA Americans, which make up 150 million of TikTok's user base, the largest TikTok audience by country so far.

One could call this a shakedown, that effectively the US is trying to steal a popular and profitable company. "That's a nice company you got there, be a shame if you... I don't know... lost 150 million users- Wouldn't it?"

[Edit: Forgot to add that even though the US has 150 million TikTok users, that's still only like 8%-ish of TikTiks total userbase- making this "shakedown" an example of how Congress is embarrassingly USA-centric. TikTok will not sell just to avoid losing just 7%-8% of it's userbase, and Congress must know that- if not, that just proves the point even more. This bill is for all intents and purposes a BAN, regardless how they try to spin it, and they're being very USA-centric and Xenophobic about it]

Anyway-

This is the second vote. A House committee voted unanimously on Mar. 7th to advance the bill, and it will be voted on again by a Republican controlled House.

Please call or email your representatives and tell them to vote "No" on bill H.R. 7521.

This isn't about just losing an app. TikTok is unique in that it is currently the easiest place to organize and spread information that otherwise doesn't get as much coverage. It allows for real time coverage and updates by those living through major events going on around the word, and has allowed for increased awareness for such events that we likely wouldn't hear about otherwise. (i.e: the genocide in Palestine, Cop City, any of the bills trying to take trans rights/abortion rights away, etc)

If you don't know your representatives, just google "who are my representatives" and the first results should be links that will help you find them based on your zip code

And if you don't know what to write I can help you there too.

You can write something as simple as just:

Vote "No" on bill H.R. 7521.

Seriously, that's all you need.

Or, if you want something a little more in depth, here's a script that you can either copy and paste or reword to your liking. I just re-worded the script from the ACLU link above to fit more specifically about the current bill (Though let's be honest, for all intents and purposes Congress is pulling the same shit in a different hat)

Dear Representative, I’m writing today to strongly urge you to protect our constitutional rights to free expression and to receive information, and to vote no on any bill that would give the federal government the power to ban entire social media platforms. Bill H.R. 7521 is designed to allow the government to ban TikTok in the US and would likely result in bans of other businesses and applications as well. Given what we know about TikTok, it’s clear that a ban would violate the First Amendment rights of millions of Americans who use the app to communicate and express themselves daily. Should these bills move to a vote, I urge you to vote “No.” In a purported attempt to protect the data of US persons from the Chinese government, these bills will instead block Americans from engaging in political discussions, artistic expression, and the free exchange of ideas. We have a First Amendment right to use TikTok and other platforms to exchange our thoughts, ideas, and opinions with people around the country and around the world. Please oppose any bill designed to limit our right to express ourselves — both online and off. Thank you.

Reminder, they vote tomorrow, Wednesday March 13th.

So please reblog this to spread the word and contact your representatives to tell them to vote "No" on this bill.

Do not be mistaken in thinking your opinion doesn't matter- it does matter so much. Do not let yourself be silenced!

[mariacallous]

TikTok went all out to defend itself in a court hearing last Monday, to block a law that could force TikTok to be sold or banned in the United States. That included using one surprising strategy: to bring other Chinese apps down with it.

Earlier this year, the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act (PAFACA), which aims to prevent national security threats from apps like TikTok, took less than two months to pass both the House and the Senate, before it was swiftly signed by President Joe Biden in April. It caught almost everyone by surprise, including TikTok. The law requires TikTok to find a US buyer to take over its operation soon, or face being banned in the US. TikTok promptly sued the government over it.

At the Court of Appeals in Washington, DC, on September 16, Andrew Pincus, a partner at law firm Mayer Brown acting for TikTok, argued that the law unfairly targets the social media app for the speech on the platform and that it violates the First Amendment. Specifically, Pincus said the law exempts other Chinese apps that could have been doing worse on the concern of data security protection.

“There are very significant ecommerce sites based in China and other places that collect much more data than TikTok does. Very sensitive data,” Pincus said. At another point in the hearing, he narrowed down the targets to “two Chinese, two e-commerce sites that would certainly meet all of the other criteria in the law.”

Pincus did not name-drop the two sites in his statements, but a TikTok court filing from August 15 cited the privacy policies of Shein and Temu—two ecommerce companies linked to China—to make the same argument Pincus made. The filing also cited research from April 2023 on the data risks of these two companies, collated by the US–China Economic and Security Review Commission.

Shein and Temu came from China’s fiercely competitive ecommerce industry and were able to take over the world by storm by shipping low-cost apparels and goods globally. Each boasts tens of millions of customers around the world, and they are often compared to TikTok as the rare examples of Chinese tech companies that have truly succeeded in the US.

TikTok, however, claims there’s an exemption clause in the PAFACA Act that essentially protects Chinese companies like Shein and Temu but not TikTok. When defining what companies are covered, the Act has only one exclusion: companies and products “whose primary purpose is to allow users to post product reviews, business reviews, or travel information and reviews.”

To be fair, the clause that TikTok highlighted was a bewildering inclusion from the beginning. Even some lawmakers claimed they weren’t sure why it was necessary to put in place such an exception.

But TikTok is seizing this opportunity to argue that, because the clause would likely protect Shein, Temu, and similar ecommerce sites that also have significant presence in the US and collect a wealth of privacy data, the Act is narrowly tailored to punish TikTok. It went as far as to claim that the clause shows Congress favors topics like products, business, and travel instead of politics, religion, and entertainment, making it a First Amendment infringement. The DOJ has denied this characterization in written court briefs.

It is a valid legal strategy, Alan Rozenshtein, an associate professor of law at the University of Minnesota Law School, explains to WIRED, as the First Amendment can consider a law unconstitutional “if the law hinges on solving a particular problem, does so in an extremely limited way, and leaves the law unsolved.”

But the judge didn’t seem to buy the argument. “It’s a rather blinkered view that the statute just singles out one company,” said Judge Douglas Ginsburg during the hearing. “It describes a category of companies, all of which are owned by or controlled by adversary powers, and subjects one company to an immediate necessity because it’s engaged in two years of negotiation with that company, held innumerable hearings, meeting after meeting after meeting, [and] an attempt to reach an agreement on a national security arrangement which failed.”

The DOJ also replied to TikTok’s problem with the exclusion clause, saying in a court brief that if the clause were to be found problematic, the right solution would be to simply take out that clause about excluding businesses, instead of invalidating the whole law.

In recent years, data security concerns have become one of the main friction points in tech policies in the US and China. While the Chinese government passed a law that regulates cross-border data transfers, the US government has taken a more piecemeal approach, investigating risks posed by products like TikTok and Chinese-made smart cars.

Some experts and lawmakers advocate for a more comprehensive legal framework to solve this issue. “This bill not only fails to solve the problem, but also jeopardizes the free speech and livelihoods of 170 million Americans who use the app. Instead, Congress should pass a bill to prevent apps, whether it's TikTok or any other social media platform, from collecting or transferring data and make foreign interference in social media algorithms illegal,” said Representative Ro Khanna in an emailed statement. Khanna voted no on the PAFACA bill.

For now, Chinese ecommerce sites like Shein and Temu have faced much less scrutiny around data security than TikTok. But TikTok’s legal strategy of highlighting the alleged data security risks of other Chinese companies will no doubt put more pressure on them. If TikTok fails its legal challenge and is banned from operating in the US unless it is sold, it’s not hard to imagine that lawmakers might turn their attention to other prominent Chinese tech companies.

“There might be some kind of legal strategy behind this, but in terms of how the public will now perceive TikTok, it has voluntarily opted to be associated with Temu and Shein and has undone a lot of the narrative work it has been trying to do,” says Ivy Yang, the founder of Wavelet Strategy, a strategic PR consultancy who has worked in Alibaba’s PR department.

By comparing TikTok’s data security concerns to Shein’s and Temu’s, the company essentially has labeled itself among a number of Chinese companies considered security risks.

So far, Shein and Temu have not made any statement about the PAFACA bill and its potential implications on their businesses. A Shein spokesperson responded in an emailed statement: “SHEIN has robust data security policies and practices in line with industry standards, and we are committed to only collecting and using the minimum amount of data needed to fulfill orders. SHEIN stores US customer data within Microsoft’s US-based Azure cloud-based solution and within AWS’s US-based cloud-based solution.” Temu and TikTok did not reply to requests for comment.

These ecommerce companies have plenty of problems to deal with at the moment too. A September White House decision to scrap a tariff exemption policy could significantly increase shipping costs for them and harm their profitability. Meanwhile, the two ecommerce companies have been embroiled in a tit-for-tat legal battle in the US since July 2023, accusing each other of monopolistic practices and deceptive marketing.

“What they are doing is basically airing all the dirty laundry,” Yang says about the Shein–Temu court fights. “It’s very much, ‘We are competitors and we have to beat the other party no matter how far we go, even though as a whole it’s a terrible look on Chinese companies.’” The same problem is playing out as TikTok seemingly decided to take down its fellow Chinese companies to save itself in the court.

But TikTok’s gambit may not pay off in the end. Even if it successfully argues that the Congress shouldn’t just target one app for its data security risks, it still needs to refute the government’s other justification for the law—that TikTok could be subject to content and algorithm manipulation by the Chinese government in the future. “The law has used two justifications. [If] one is invalid and the other is valid, the law is still valid,” says Rozenshtein.

There has been no proof—at least not in the nonredacted materials—that the Chinese government is currently interfering with TikTok’s content in the US. But during last week’s hearing, none of the judges seemed interested in discussing this point with TikTok or the government.

“[TikTok] made the best argument they could. Just the argument went very poorly for them,” Rozenshtein says. “I don’t think it’s conceivable that TikTok will win, at least on this level.”

[low-cole-timothy]

Who owns who?

The weirdest part about the Jews Control the Media trope is that at least one of Facebook’s founders and Meta’s CEO is Jewish. Meta, of course, are the company who owns Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp.

Much of the communications by these Pro-Hamas antisemites is done via Instagram - literally a Jew-owned platform yet they freely spew their antisemitic vitriol on it.

So basically what the useful idiots are saying is “the Jews control the media! The news won’t show you the truth! Here, look at my Instagram account (which is owned by a Jew) and I will show you how the Joos are controlling everything!”

So then they say let’s use Telegram which was founded in Russia, and is now located in Dubai - but won’t disclose where it rents it offices. (Source: Wikipedia)

How about TikTok? Countries have fined, banned, or attempted to restrict TikTok to protect children or out of national security concerns over possible user data collection by the Chinese government. (Source: Wikipedia)

Sooooo… let’s use a Russian app and a Chinese app and a Jewish owned platform to spread antisemitism and then claim the Joos are evil baby killers and the mainstream media won’t tell you the truth!!!!1

Did I get that right?

[colorisbyshe]

I do think organizing around Palestine is a factor in the government going after tiktok but, well, the government has been going after tiktok… since tiktok blew up in America and I think it’s important to recognize at as essential as the Palestine bit is, it’s also to recognize the bigger piece of the possible is Sinophobia and that being an “easy” rallying point for everyone’s bases in an election year. Not to mention pandering to older people who hate things that represent “the youth” and the places they blame for radicalizing them.

Cause tiktok, instagram, tumblr, and even parts of reddit (though many subreddits ban anyone who even criticizes Israel) all have large bases organizing for Palestine. But tiktok is the only one owned by a Chinese company—fearmongering about China and communism has been a tactic for both parties for a long time now.

That’s also why their “solution” is force the sale from a Chinese company—they don’t care if tiktok still exists and is used by kids or whatever, not as much as they care about putting China (or something REPRESENTING China) in a Catch-22. Force the Chinese company that owns Tiktok to sell and take China lose a huge financial asset and global influence. Or let them refuse, imply it’s because the app rly is a tool of the CCP, and then kneecap tiktok’s market, again hitting them financially and in terms of influence.

I’m rly not trying to diminish the anti-Palestine sentiments that are absolutely emboldening this move but anti-tiktok moves have pre-dated the recent organizing.

I think it’s important to call out sinophobia and how many people are cheerleading this move because “fuck China.”

And how this is just the easiest gateway into censoring other parts of the internet, setting a precedent, laying the foundation on an already hated app/website to make room to attack less controversial places.

There are many factors to this but this is the biggest one and the easiest way to sell to the average constituent.