The US government wants to make sure only they can use DataFarming platforms to spy on and influence US citizens. They're following the example set by the CCP, which has been blocking foreign-owned platforms for years, for similar reasons.
@nicholas_saunders
> I for one, would prefer that our own national security aparatus spy on us rather than the CCP
Really? I'd rather ours spy on the CCP than on us ; )
Seriously though, I think what the comparison tells us is that the datafarming apparatus is an existential threat to democracy. If we don't want our political systems to become more like China's, we need to rapidly disassemble those apparatus. Not tinker with their ownership.
@nicholas_saunders
> I'm more than okay with taking down TikTok because of the CCP
Oh don't get me wrong, I'm not crying any tears for ByteDance. AFAIC they can take a long walk off a short pier, like all other corporations. But let's not kid ourselves that the forced sale of TikTok to Silicon Valley VCs protects anyone using it from state surveillance or influence operations. Given everything we know about how DataFarms work, it clearly won't.
@strypey I think "sovereign internet" as a policy direction is much more widespread than one'd think across many countries. (For an example in a "freer" jurisdiction, consider EU vs. big tech, which I see as more anti-American than actually helping consumers.) Eventually the internet will be once again broken into different regions...
@austin
> EU vs. big tech, which I see as more anti-American than actually helping consumers
That seems like a false dichotomy. The EU regulators have recognised that it's not good for EU citizens and their data to be trapped inside corporate silos. Most of which happen to be headquartered in the US. A country which benefited from the way the EU was weakened by the UK leaving. Which in turn was achieved, in part, by using those same US-headquartered corporate silos (FB+Cambridge Analytica etc).
@austin
So in summary, I would say the EU have learned the same lesson as the CCP; that free and open networks are better for democracy. How they respond, by empowering or preventing free and open networks - tells you what they think about democracy. Which brings us back to what the US following the CCP playbook tells us.
Biden's approach to TikYoke is something I'd expect from the Orange Menace, not from an administration under which regulators have mostly been following the EU example.
@strypey I don't think Biden is really following the EU approach, there's just too much corporate interest to let that happen. Ultimately, like in India, banning TikTok benefits Meta.
I think EU's end goal is a sovereign internet (esp. how they posture against big tech), it's just that they lack teeth and also incentive for alternative platforms.
@austin
> I don't think Biden is really following the EU approach
Then you're not paying attention to all the US anti-trust cases that have launched against US datafarmers in the last 4 years.
> I think EU's end goal is a sovereign internet (esp. how they posture against big tech), it's just that they lack teeth and also incentive for alternative platforms
You're living in a totally different universe to me. Does yours not have the GDPR, DSA etc, which apply equally to big online platforms?
The GDPR is as toothless as it gets. Tracking did not stop because of it, it just led to every site pushing even more dark patterns to trick people into giving consent.
If the US does push for something like DMA against Apple and Google, then I'll start believing it.
@austin
> I think EU's end goal is a sovereign internet (esp. how they posture against big tech), it's just that they lack teeth and also incentive for alternative platforms
Add comment