AmbiguousProps

@AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

AmbiguousProps,

It’s never been to protect the public. If that were the case, the law wouldn’t apply to just TikTok and foreign companies. They would’ve passed something to protect us from our own domestic data brokers too, but they didn’t.

AmbiguousProps,

That will never happen, at least not in this way. Because it wasn’t anything to do with their data collection, or their company structure. Congress is happy to allow domestic data collection and want Americans addicted to American apps so that they get a cut.

AmbiguousProps,

People on TikTok are already discussing using VPNs, so it will happen if not sold.

And either way, it’s almost like congress doesn’t care about addictive social media, seeing as it’s fine if domestic companies create addictive algorithms. They’ll even let foreign governments manipulate the populous via domestic companies, so long as they get a cut of the cash.

AmbiguousProps,

You are literally posting this to social media right now. Do you think it would be cool to ban or force a sale of Lemmy to a US corp?

AmbiguousProps,

Why is it okay for domestic companies to collect the same data and sell it to China, then?

This shouldn’t just affect foreign companies if it’s about data collection. It should have been an actual privacy bill. US citizens’ privacy will be no better after this.

AmbiguousProps,

Their personal data won’t be kept away from the CCP. People that use TikTok will use VPNs to do so if needed (TikTok also would no longer have to listen to the US government, probably intensifying the data collection), and otherwise the CCP can just purchase (or steal) the data from US data brokers, because those are still very much legal. Did we forget about Cambridge Analytica, where an adversarial foreign government used our own domestic companies against us?

AmbiguousProps,

Because this isn’t accountability? It won’t start any change with domestic companies, because it doesn’t apply to them. This isn’t the start of anything. If you think they’re going to use this as the starting point for actual privacy legislation, you’re very ignorant of how congress works.

Data collection will still happen domestically, and another Cambridge Analytica will happen, so long as domestic data brokers are legal.

AmbiguousProps,

Does congress care about data collection and predatory algorithms, though? If so, why did they just waste their time crafting a targeted bill rather than actually making those practices illegal?

If congress suddenly decided that they didn’t like a company for whatever reason, they’ll craft another targeted bill like this one. Trump could win this year, do you really want this precedent set right before that?

Luckily, Lemmy is much more difficult due to it’s decentralized nature. However, since congress is clearly more than willing to craft targeted bills, it’s not out of the question.

AmbiguousProps,

So everyone on TikTok is a foreigner now?

AmbiguousProps,

I bet less than 2% of users use VPNs

TikTok users or in general? Either way, it’s higher than that, and will only increase with bills like this (and the many state-issued porn bans).

I don’t think people with enough brain cells to use VPN

VPNs aren’t hard to use, by design. Do you really think people need in-depth tutorials on how to press a button in an app? Also, there’s already people demonstrating VPN use on TikTok, for if the ban actually happens.

I really like how you point out the danger of the Cambridge Analytica incident, but then bemoan trying to keep data harvesting away from a foreign adversary.

You have very black and white thinking. I’m bemoaning it because it doesn’t actually protect US citizens. It doesn’t stop China from harvesting our data, and it doesn’t stop domestic companies either. But good try, trying to belittle the massive data breaches that have happened without TikTok’s help.

Domestic data policy drastically needs an overhaul, but we have to start somewhere.

Once again, this isn’t the start of that. Congress is more than happy to allow domestic companies to harvest our data, because half of the time they’re getting a cut. This will not open any doors for future privacy bills. The only possibility with this is that congress crafts another targeted bill to get rid of another company for whatever reason.

Also, Cambridge Analytica had a fucking shitstain president/administration running interference because they benefited directly from it.

Interesting that you’d bring that up, seeing as congress just set this precedent for banning companies right before that shitstain has a real chance of getting into office. Do you really want the Trump administration to pass a bill like this for another company?

AmbiguousProps,

They didn’t seem to care much when Cambridge Analytica happened, and that was a foreign adversary. So what’s different here?

AmbiguousProps,

I meant that the data they collected was breached by a foreign adversary, thought that was pretty clear but guess not.

AmbiguousProps,

Yes, my point was this only affects one of them. It doesn’t fix the root of the problem, because that’s not the bill’s target.

In fact, if TikTok remains, and does get banned, it just makes it so they no longer have to listen to the US government for anything.

AmbiguousProps,

You’re missing my point. The adversaries have many more avenues than just TikTok (like breaching the domestic companies that collect the data). The law is too specific and therefore does not actually protect us in any real way, at least not on a personal level.

AmbiguousProps, (edited )

Does it stop my data from getting to the CCP? Nope, so I would say it’s too specific. The problem is not TikTok exclusively, the problem is that the data is collected and sold in the first place. This doesn’t stop that.

Also, it leaves a bad taste when you say it was crafted to narrowly skirt the 1st amendment. That’s not a good thing, so I’m not sure why you’re trying to imply that it is.

Amnesty: World seeing near breakdown of international law amid wars in Gaza and Ukraine (apnews.com)

The world is seeing a near breakdown of international law amid flagrant rule-breaking in Gaza and Ukraine, multiplying armed conflicts, the rise of authoritarianism and huge rights violations in Sudan, Ethiopia and Myanmar, Amnesty International warned Wednesday as it published its annual report....

AmbiguousProps,

We’ll see, I suppose. I’m highly doubtful at the moment.

AmbiguousProps,

I probably won’t ever play 76, but I’m happily doing yet another NV playthrough.

Tesla’s in its flop era (www.theverge.com)

When Tesla releases its first quarter earnings this afternoon, the company’s CEO Elon Musk will field the usual questions about new products, new factories, and progress toward its futuristic vision of self-driving cars and robot workers. But Musk will also face increasingly urgent questions about its current state of affairs...

AmbiguousProps, (edited )

The idea of a truck EV isn’t bad market wise, look at Rivian for example. It was purely poor execution, no doubt attributed to Musk.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • megavids
  • rosin
  • ngwrru68w68
  • tacticalgear
  • DreamBathrooms
  • mdbf
  • magazineikmin
  • thenastyranch
  • Youngstown
  • khanakhh
  • everett
  • slotface
  • Durango
  • kavyap
  • JUstTest
  • osvaldo12
  • normalnudes
  • cubers
  • GTA5RPClips
  • InstantRegret
  • cisconetworking
  • anitta
  • ethstaker
  • Leos
  • modclub
  • tester
  • provamag3
  • lostlight
  • All magazines